Objectives: Although the last few years have seen an increased number of smartphone applications (apps) disseminated in the field of Otolaryngology (ORL), these apps vary widely in quality. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to systematically review ORL apps directed towards patients in mobile app stores and the current literature. Methods: The Google Play Store, Apple App Store and PubMed were searched for ORL apps for patients using various keywords pertaining to different ORL subspecialties. Apps not relevant to the scope of this research and/or duplicates, educational apps, apps promoting a business, apps requiring specific separate hardware, and apps in non-English were excluded. In PubMed, keywords pertaining to the subspecialties were combined with “mobile app” in a search query; literature reviews, editorials, case reports, conference papers, duplicate articles, and articles irrelevant to ORL apps were excluded. The quality of apps with the highest number of reviews was assessed using the “Mobile App Rating Scale” (MARS), while the quality of the articles was rated using “The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology” (STROBE) Statement. Results: After searching the app stores, 1074 apps were included and grouped according to their ORL subspecialties. The overall MARS score of the ten most popular apps in each category was 3.65 out of 5. A total of 636 articles were identified in the literature, and 193 were included. The mean adherence percentage of the articles to the STROBE checklist was of 84.37%. Conclusions: Although the apps currently available need further development, their application in ORL appears promising. Further dialogue between physicians and patients, as well as formal support from professional and scientific associations, should be encouraged.

Mobile Applications in Otolaryngology: A Systematic Review of the Literature, Apple App Store and the Google Play Store

Trecca E. M. C.
Conceptualization
;
Gelardi M.;Cassano M.
Methodology
2020-01-01

Abstract

Objectives: Although the last few years have seen an increased number of smartphone applications (apps) disseminated in the field of Otolaryngology (ORL), these apps vary widely in quality. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to systematically review ORL apps directed towards patients in mobile app stores and the current literature. Methods: The Google Play Store, Apple App Store and PubMed were searched for ORL apps for patients using various keywords pertaining to different ORL subspecialties. Apps not relevant to the scope of this research and/or duplicates, educational apps, apps promoting a business, apps requiring specific separate hardware, and apps in non-English were excluded. In PubMed, keywords pertaining to the subspecialties were combined with “mobile app” in a search query; literature reviews, editorials, case reports, conference papers, duplicate articles, and articles irrelevant to ORL apps were excluded. The quality of apps with the highest number of reviews was assessed using the “Mobile App Rating Scale” (MARS), while the quality of the articles was rated using “The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology” (STROBE) Statement. Results: After searching the app stores, 1074 apps were included and grouped according to their ORL subspecialties. The overall MARS score of the ten most popular apps in each category was 3.65 out of 5. A total of 636 articles were identified in the literature, and 193 were included. The mean adherence percentage of the articles to the STROBE checklist was of 84.37%. Conclusions: Although the apps currently available need further development, their application in ORL appears promising. Further dialogue between physicians and patients, as well as formal support from professional and scientific associations, should be encouraged.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11369/396610
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact