top of page
  • Writer's pictureAdmin

References

Updated: Oct 1, 2019


 

  1. Gunter RL, Chouinard S, Fernandes-Taylor S, Wiseman JT, Clarkson S, Bennett K, et al. Current Use of Telemedicine for Post-Discharge Surgical Care: A Systematic Review. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2016;222:915–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.01.062.

  2. Sanger PC, Hartzler A, Lordon RJ, Armstrong CA, Lober WB, Evans HL, et al. A patient-centered system in a provider-centered world: challenges of incorporating post-discharge wound data into practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 2016;23:514–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv183.

  3. Sanger P, Hartzler A, Lober WB, Evans HL, Pratt W. Design Considerations for Post-Acute Care mHealth: Patient Perspectives. AMIA . Annual Symposium Proceedings AMIA Symposium 2014;2014:1920–9.

  4. Sanger PC, Simianu VV, Gaskill CE, Armstrong CA, Hartzler AL, Lordon RJ, et al. Diagnosing Surgical Site Infection Using Wound Photography: A Scenario-Based Study. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2017;224:8-15.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.10.027.

  5. Evans HL, Lober WB. A Pilot Use of Patient-Generated Wound Data to Improve Postdischarge Surgical Site Infection Monitoring. JAMA Surgery 2017;152:595–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0568.

  6. Fernandes-Taylor S, Gunter RL, Bennett KM, Awoyinka L, Rahman S, Greenberg CC, et al. Feasibility of Implementing a Patient-Centered Postoperative Wound Monitoring Program Using Smartphone Images: A Pilot Protocol. JMIR Research Protocols 2017;6:e26. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.6819.

  7. Armstrong KA, Coyte PC, Brown M, Beber B, Semple JL. Effect of Home Monitoring via Mobile App on the Number of In-Person Visits Following Ambulatory Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surgery 2017;152:622–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0111.

  8. Kummerow Broman K, Roumie CL, Stewart MK, Castellanos JA, Tarpley JL, Dittus RS, et al. Implementation of a Telephone Postoperative Clinic in an Integrated Health System. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2016;223:644–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.07.010.

  9. National Information Center on Health Services Research & Health Care Technology (U.S.). HTA 101: Introduction to Health Technology Assessment [Internet]. HTA 101: Introduction to Health Technology Assessment. 2014 [cited 2017 May 10]; Available from: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/hta101/ta10103.html

  10. Green Park Collaborative, USA [Internet]. Effectiveness Guidance Document (EGD) Process. [cited 2017 May 10];Available from: http://www.cmtpnet.org/docs/resources/EGD_Process_JUNE_2014.pdf

  11. Drummond MF, Schwartz JS, Jönsson B, Luce BR, Neumann PJ, Siebert U, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462308080343.

  12. Kellermann AL, Jones SS. What It Will Take To Achieve The As-Yet-Unfulfilled Promises Of Health Information Technology. Health Affairs 2013;32:63–8. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0693.

  13. McCurdie T, Taneva S, Casselman M, Yeung M, McDaniel C, Ho W, et al. mHealth Consumer Apps : The Case for User-Centered Design. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology 2012;46:49–56. https://doi.org/10.2345/0899-8205-46.s2.49.

  14. Henshall C, Schuller T, HTAi Policy Forum. Health technology assessment, value-based decision making, and innovation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2013;29:353–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462313000378.

  15. Wallis L, Hasselberg M, Barkman C, Bogoch I, Broomhead S, Dumont G, et al. A roadmap for the implementation of mHealth innovations for image-based diagnostic support in clinical and public-health settings: a focus on front-line health workers and health-system organizations. Global Health Action 2017;10:1340254. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2017.1340254.

  16. Maguire M. Methods to support human-centred design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2001;55:587–634. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2001.0503.

  17. McMullen C, Nielsen M, Firemark A, Price PM, Nakatani D, Tuthill J, et al. Designing for impact: identifying stakeholder-driven interventions to support recovery after major cancer surgery. Supportive Care in Cancer 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4276-0.

  18. Schnall R, Rojas M, Bakken S, Brown W, Carballo-Dieguez A, Carry M, et al. A user-centered model for designing consumer mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps). Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2016;60:243–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2016.02.002.

  19. Stanziola E, Uznayo MQ, Ortiz JM, Simon M, Otero C, Campos F, et al. User-Centered Design of Health Care Software Development: Towards a Cultural Change. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 2015:368–371. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-564-7-368.

  20. Stojmenova E, Imperl B, Žohar T, Dinevski D. Adapted User-Centered Design: A Strategy for the Higher User Acceptance of Innovative e-Health Services. Future Internet 2012;4:776–87. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi4030776.

  21. Fawsitt CG, Meaney S, Greene RA, Corcoran P. Surgical site infection after caesarean section? There is an app for that: Results from a feasibility study on costs and benefits. Irish Medical Journal 2017;110:635.

  22. Gunter R, Fernandes-Taylor S, Mahnke A, Awoyinka L, Schroeder C, Wiseman J, et al. Evaluating Patient Usability of an Image-Based Mobile Health Platform for Postoperative Wound Monitoring. JMIR MHealth and UHealth 2016;4:e113. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.6023.

  23. Wiseman JT, Fernandes-Taylor S, Barnes ML, Tomsejova A, Saunders RS, Kent KC. Conceptualizing smartphone use in outpatient wound assessment: patients’ and caregivers’ willingness to use technology. The Journal of Surgical Research 2015;198:245–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.05.011.

  24. de Heide J, Vroegh CJ, Torok TS, Gobbens RJJ, Zijlstra F, Takens-Lameijer M, et al. A Pilot Feasibility Study of Telemedical Wound Assessment Using a Mobile Phone in Cardiology Patients. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2017;32:E9–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/jcn.0000000000000377.

  25. Gunter RL, Fernandes-Taylor S, Rahman S, Awoyinka L, Bennett KM, Weber SM, et al. Feasibility of an Image-Based Mobile Health Protocol for Postoperative Wound Monitoring. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2018;226:277–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.12.013.

  26. Higgins J, Murnaghan L, Semple J, Sharpe S, Carvalhana I, Theodoropoulos J. Examining the feasibility of a mobile web-based follow-up system for post-operative ACL reconstruction patients. Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 2013;29:e176–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2013.07.245.

  27. Higgins J, Semple J, Murnaghan L, Sharpe S, Theodoropoulos J. Mobile Web-Based Follow-up for Postoperative ACL Reconstruction A Single-Center Experience. Orthop J Sports Med 2017;5:. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967117745278.

  28. Hwang H. Electronic wound monitoring after ambulatory breast cancer surgery: Improving patient care and satisfaction using a smart phone app. B C Med J 2016;58:448–53.

  29. Kummerow Broman K, Oyefule OO, Phillips SE, Baucom RB, Holzman MD, Sharp KW, et al. Postoperative Care Using a Secure Online Patient Portal: Changing the (Inter)Face of General Surgery Presented at the American College of Surgeons 101st Annual Clinical Congress, Scientific Forum, Chicago, IL, October 2015. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2015;221:1057–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.08.429.

  30. Perez F, Monton E, Nodal MJ, Vinoles J, Guillen S, Traver V. Evaluation of a mobile health system for supporting postoperative patients following day surgery. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 2006;12 Suppl 1:41–3. https://doi.org/10.1258/135763306777978506.

  31. Semple JL, Sharpe S, Murnaghan ML, Theodoropoulos J, Metcalfe KA. Using a mobile app for monitoring post-operative quality of recovery of patients at home: a feasibility study. JMIR MHealth and UHealth 2015;3:e18. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.3929.

  32. Segura-Sampedro JJ, Rivero-Belenchon I, Pino-Diaz V, Rodriguez Sanchez MC, Pareja-Ciuro F, Padillo-Ruiz J, et al. Feasibility and safety of surgical wound remote follow-up by smart phone in appendectomy: A pilot study. Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) 2017;21:58–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2017.07.040.

  33. Symer MM, Abelson JS, Milsom J, McClure B, Yeo HL. A Mobile Health Application to Track Patients After Gastrointestinal Surgery: Results from a Pilot Study. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery : Official Journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2017;21:1500–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-017-3482-2.

  34. Sanger PC, Hartzler A, Han SM, Armstrong CA, Stewart MR, Lordon RJ, et al. Patient perspectives on post-discharge surgical site infections: towards a patient-centered mobile health solution. PloS One 2014;9:e114016. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114016.

  35. Luxton DD, Kayl RA, Mishkind MC. mHealth Data Security: The Need for HIPAA-Compliant Standardization. Telemedicine and E-Health 2012;18:284–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2011.0180.

  36. Bhuyan S, Kim H, Isehunwa OO, Kumar N, Bhatt J, Wyant DK, et al. Privacy and security issues in mobile health: Current research and future directions. Health Policy and Technology 2017;6:188–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2017.01.004.

  37. Cartwright-Smith L, Gray E, Thorpe JH. Health Information Ownership: Legal Theories and Policy Implications n.d.:37.

  38. Cvrkel T. The ethics of mHealth: Moving forward. Journal of Dentistry 2018;74:S15–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.04.024.

  39. He D, Naveed M, Gunter CA, Nahrstedt K. Security Concerns in Android mHealth Apps n.d.:10.

  40. Sampat B, Prabakhar B. Privacy Risks and Security Threats in mHealth Apps 2017;26:29.

  41. Baig MM, GholamHosseini H, Connolly MJ. Mobile healthcare applications: system design review, critical issues and challenges. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine 2015;38:23–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-014-0315-4.

  42. Miller MW, Ross RK, Voight C, Brouwer H, Karavite DJ, Gerber JS, et al. Patient-generated Digital Images after Pediatric Ambulatory Surgery. Appl Clin Inform 2016;7:646–52. https://doi.org/10.4338/aci-2015-12-cr-0168.

  43. Sikka N, Carlin KN, Pines J, Pirri M, Strauss R, Rahimi F. The use of mobile phones for acute wound care: attitudes and opinions of emergency department patients. Journal of Health Communication 2012;17 Suppl 1:37–42; quiz 42–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.649161.

  44. Mikk KA, Sleeper HA, Topol EJ. The Pathway to Patient Data Ownership and Better Health. JAMA 2017;318:1433. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.12145.

  45. Petersen C, DeMuro P. Legal and Regulatory Considerations Associated with Use of Patient-Generated Health Data from Social Media and Mobile Health (mHealth) Devices. Applied Clinical Informatics 2015;06:16–26. https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2014-09-R-0082.

  46. Fountain V. to Manage Patient- Generated Health Data n.d.:4.

  47. Chen CH, Young TH, Huang CH, Chang HH, Chen CL, Chien HF, et al. Patient-centered wound teleconsultation for cutaneous wounds: a feasibility study. Annals of Plastic Surgery 2014;72:220–4.

  48. Chen DW, Davis RW, Balentine CJ, Scott AR, Gao Y, Tapia NM, et al. Utility of routine postoperative visit after appendectomy and cholecystectomy with evaluation of mobile technology access in an urban safety net population. J Surg Res 2014;190:478–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.04.028.

  49. Diederich L, Johnson T. Integrating remote follow-up into electronic health records workflow. Health Policy and Technology 2014;3:126–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2014.01.002.

  50. Yen P-Y, Lara B, Lopetegui M, Bharat A, Ardoin S, Johnson B, et al. Usability and Workflow Evaluation of “RhEumAtic Disease activitY” (READY): A Mobile Application for Rheumatology Patients and Providers. Applied Clinical Informatics 2016;07:1007–24. https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2016-03-RA-0036.

  51. Bolster NM, Bastawrous A, Giardini ME. Towards a Workflow Driven Design for MHealth Devices within Temporary Eye Clinics in Low-Income Settings. Presented at the 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Milan.

  52. Gazzarata R, Vergari F, Verlinden J-M, Morandi F, Naso S, Parodi V, et al. The Integration of e-health into the Clinical Workflow – Electronic Health Record and Standardization Efforts. In: Donnelly M, Paggetti C, Nugent C, Mokhtari M, editors. Impact Analysis of Solutions for Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, vol. 7251. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012. p. 107–15.

  53. Aschettino L, Baldwin K, Friedman B, Grady R, Grebner L, Hennings, ME et al. Including patient generated health data in electronic health records. Journal of AHIMA 2015;54-7.

  54. Gorman RK, Wellbeloved-Stone CA, Valdez RS. Uncovering the Invisible Patient Work System through a Case Study of Breast Cancer Self-Management. Ergonomics 2018:1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1503339.

  55. Klasnja P, Civan Hartzler A, Unruh KT, Pratt W. Blowing in the Wind: Unanchored Patient Information Work during Cancer Care. Presented at the the 28th international conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

  56. Sacchi L, Fux A, Napolitano C, Panzarasa S, Peleg M, Quaglini S, et al. Patient-tailored Workflow Patterns from Clinical Practice Guidelines Recommendations. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 2013:392–396. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-289-9-392.

  57. Unruh KT, Pratt W. The Invisible Work of Being a Patient and Implications for Health Care: “[the doctor is] my business partner in the most important business in my life, staying alive.” Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings 2008;2008:40–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-8918.2008.tb00093.x.

  58. Ali S, Romero J, Morrison K, Hafeez B, Ancker J. Focus Section Health IT Usability: Applying a Task-Technology Fit Model to Adapt an Electronic Patient Portal for Patient Work. Applied Clinical Informatics 2018;09:174–84. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1632396.

  59. Ozkaynak M, Flatley Brennan P, Hanauer DA, Johnson S, Aarts J, Zheng K, et al. Patient-centered care requires a patient-oriented workflow model. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2013;20:e14–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001633.

  60. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Internet]. Public health information network communities of practice. [cited 2018 October 8];Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/phcommunities/index.html

  61. Edgar D, Watson R, Towle S, et al. Learning to walk the community of practice tightrope. International Practice Development Journal 2016;6:1–8. https://doi.org/10.19043/ipdj.62.009.

  62. Gullick JG, West SH. Building research capacity and productivity among advanced practice nurses: an evaluation of the Community of Practice model. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2016;72:605–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12850.

  63. Merrill JA, Keeling JW, Wilson RV, Chen TV. Growth of a Scientific Community of Practice. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2011;41:100–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.03.014.

  64. Perera CM, Chakrabarti R. A review of m-health in medical imaging. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health : The Official Journal of the American Telemedicine Association 2015;21:132–7. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2013.0330.

  65. Tensen E, van der Heijden JP, Jaspers MWM, Witkamp L. Two Decades of Teledermatology: Current Status and Integration in National Healthcare Systems. Current Dermatology Reports 2016;5:96–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13671-016-0136-7.

  66. Berndt RD, Takenga MC, Kuehn S, Preik P, Dubbermann D, Juenger M. Development of a mobile teledermatology system. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health : The Official Journal of the American Telemedicine Association 2012;18:668–73. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2011.0273.

  67. Parmanto B, Pramana G, Yu DX, Fairman AD, Dicianno BE. Development of mHealth system for supporting self-management and remote consultation of skincare. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2015;15:. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0237-4.

  68. Weber SA, Watermann N, Jossinet J, Byrne JA, Chantrey J, Alam S, et al. Remote Wound Monitoring of Chronic Ulcers. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 2010;14:371–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITB.2010.2042605.

  69. Von Der Werth J, Vaughan G. Primary teledermatology: As efficient as secondary teledermatology. British Journal of Dermatology 2015;173:181. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.13795.

  70. Wu X, Oliveria SA, Yagerman S, Chen L, DeFazio J, Braun R, et al. Feasibility and Efficacy of Patient-Initiated Mobile Teledermoscopy for Short-term Monitoring of Clinically Atypical Nevi. JAMA Dermatology 2015;151:489. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.3837.

  71. Chakraborty C, Gupta B, Ghosh SK. Mobile metadata assisted community database of chronic wound images. Wound Medicine 2014;6:34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wndm.2014.09.002.

  72. Ciancio F, Portincasa A, Parisi D, Innocenti A. MowA(R): A simple and economic way of monitoring chronic wounds outcome with your mobile devices. Annali Italiani Di Chirurgia 2017;88:94.

  73. Friesen M, Hamel C, McLeod R. A mHealth Application for Chronic Wound Care: Findings of a User Trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2013;10:6199–214. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph10116199.

  74. Rees RS, Bashshur N. The effects of TeleWound management on use of service and financial outcomes. Telemed J e-Health 2007;13:663–74. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2007.9971.

  75. Mukherjee R, Tewary S, Routray A. Diagnostic and Prognostic Utility of Non-Invasive Multimodal Imaging in Chronic Wound Monitoring: a Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Systems 2017;41:. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0679-y.

  76. Wang L, Pedersen PC, Strong DM, Tulu B, Agu E, Ignotz R. Smartphone-based wound assessment system for patients with diabetes. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 2015;62:477–88. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2014.2358632.

  77. Wang L, Pedersen PC, Strong DM, Tulu B, Agu E, Ignotz R, et al. An Automatic Assessment System of Diabetic Foot Ulcers Based on Wound Area Determination, Color Segmentation, and Healing Score Evaluation. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology 2016;10:421–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296815599004.

  78. Wu K, Guler O, Cheng P, Kim P. Mobile wound assessment using novel computer vision methods. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2014;219:S64–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.07.150.

  79. Vreeland A, Persons KR, Primo H, Bishop M, Garriott KM, Doyle MK, et al. Considerations for Exchanging and Sharing Medical Images for Improved Collaboration and Patient Care: HIMSS-SIIM Collaborative White Paper. Journal of Digital Imaging 2016;29:547–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-016-9885-x.

  80. Rochon M, Sanders J, Gallagher R. Service design: a database approach to the management of digital images of wounds in the hospital setting. Wounds UK 2017;13:41-49.

  81. Zhang XL, Wang WL, Lv XQ. Research on Technology of Medical Image Database and its Connection with HIS Database. Advanced Materials Research 2011;267:119–23. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.267.119.

  82. Shah PM, Evans HL, Harrigan A, Sawyer RG, Friel CM, Hedrick TL. Wound Concerns and Healthcare Consumption of Resources after Colorectal Surgery: An Opportunity for Innovation? Surgical Infections 2017;18:634–40. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2017.003.

  83. Shah P, Evans H, Harrigan A, Sawyer R, Friel C, Hedrick T. The morbidity of a wound: Apatient centered assessment. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 2016;59:e300. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.dcr.0000482708.50838.af.

  84. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care–associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. American Journal of Infection Control 2008;36:309–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2008.03.002.

  85. Wilson APR, Weavill C, Burridge J, Kelsey MC. The use of the wound scoring method ‘ASEPSIS’ in postoperative wound surveillance. Journal of Hospital Infection 1990;16:297–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-6701(90)90002-6.

  86. Siah RCJ, Childs C. A systematic review of surgical infection scoring systems used in surgical patients: JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports 2011;9:2627–83. https://doi.org/10.11124/01938924-201109600-00001.

  87. Wilson AP, Gibbons C, Reeves BC, Hodgson B, Liu M, Plummer D, et al. Surgical wound infection as a performance indicator: agreement of common definitions of wound infection in 4773 patients. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed) 2004;329:720.

  88. Yamamoto T, Takahashi S, Ichihara K, Hiyama Y, Uehara T, Hashimoto J, et al. How do we understand the disagreement in the frequency of surgical site infection between the CDC and Clavien-Dindo classifications? Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy : Official Journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy 2015;21:130–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2014.10.016.

  89. Hedrick TL, Harrigan AM, Sawyer RG, Turrentine FE, Stukenborg GJ, Umapathi BA, et al. Defining Surgical Site Infection in Colorectal Surgery: An Objective Analysis Using Serial Photographic Documentation. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 2015;58:1070–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/dcr.0000000000000466.

  90. Hedrick TL, Sawyer RG, Hennessy SA, Turrentine FE, Friel CM. Can we define surgical site infection accurately in colorectal surgery? Surgical Infections 2014;15:372–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2013.013.

  91. Henriksen NA, Meyhoff CS, Wetterslev J, Wille-Jorgensen P, Rasmussen LS, Jorgensen LN. Clinical relevance of surgical site infection as defined by the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Journal of Hospital Infection 2010;75:173–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2009.12.022.

  92. Lepelletier D, Ravaud P, Baron G, Lucet JC. Agreement among health care professionals in diagnosing case vignette-based surgical site infections. PloS One 2012;7:. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035131.

  93. Nota SP, Braun Y, Ring D, Schwab JH. Incidence of surgical site infection after spine surgery: what is the impact of the definition of infection? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 2015;473:1612–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3933-y.

  94. Landa DL, van Dishoeck AM, Steyerberg EW, Hovius SE. Quality of measurements of acute surgical and traumatic wounds using a digital wound-analysing tool. International Wound Journal 2016;13:619–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12330.

  95. Macefield RC, Reeves BC, Milne TK, Nicholson A, Blencowe NS, Calvert M, et al. Development of a single, practical measure of surgical site infection (SSI) for patient report or observer completion. Journal of Infection Prevention 2017;18:170–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757177416689724.

  96. Glasgow RE, Vinson C, Chambers D, Khoury MJ, Kaplan RM, Hunter C. National Institutes of Health Approaches to Dissemination and Implementation Science: Current and Future Directions. American Journal of Public Health 2012;102:1274–81. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300755.

  97. Lobb R, Colditz GA. Implementation Science and Its Application to Population Health. Annual Review of Public Health 2013;34:235–51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031912-114444.

  98. Madon T, Hofman KJ, Kupfer L, Glass RI. PUBLIC HEALTH: Implementation Science. Science 2007;318:1728–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1150009.

  99. Bardosh KL, Murray M, Khaemba AM, Smillie K, Lester R. Operationalizing mHealth to improve patient care: a qualitative implementation science evaluation of the WelTel texting intervention in Canada and Kenya. Globalization and Health 2017;13:. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-017-0311-z

  100. Hynes DM, Whittier ER, Owens A. Health information technology and implementation science. Medical Care 2013;3:S6-12.

  101. Tilahun B, Smillie K, Bardosh KL, Murray M, Fitzgerald M, Cook V, et al. Identifying Barriers and Facilitators of 13 mHealth Projects in North America and Africa: Protocol for a 5-Year Implementation Science Study. JMIR Research Protocols 2018;7:e162. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.9633

40 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

HTA Introduction

Surgical site infection (SSI) remains the most common post-operative complication, and is a leading cause of preventable morbidity and avoidable hospital readmissions. Indications of incipient infecti

Approach and Scope

ASSIST aims to evaluate and define the current uses and possible roles of PGHD and mobile devices in post-operative surgical care and SSI surveillance, provide a set of recommendations for PGHD that i

Stakeholder Engagement

The process described above centered on a stakeholder engagement framework that included targeted engagement activities to solicit a wide range of perspectives and expertise. These activities included

bottom of page