Mobile health technologies (mHealth) are patient-worn or portable devices aimed at increasing the granularity and relevance of clinical measurements. The implementation of mHealth has the potential to decrease sample size, duration, and cost of clinical trials. We performed a review of the ClinicalTrials.gov database using a standardized approach to identify adoption in and usefulness of mHealth in movement disorders interventional clinical trials. Trial phase, geographical area, availability of data captured, constructs of interest, and outcome priority were collected. Eligible trials underwent quality appraisal using an ad hoc 5-point checklist to assess mHealth feasibility, acceptability, correlation with patient-centered outcome measures, and clinical meaningfulness. A total of 29% (n = 54/184) registered trials were using mHealth, mainly in Parkinson’s disease and essential tremor (59.3% and 27.8%). In most cases, mHealth were used in phase 2 trials (83.3%) as secondary outcome measures (59.3%). Only five phase 3 trials, representing 9.3% of the total, used mHealth (1 as primary outcome measure, 3 as secondary, and 1 as tertiary). Only 3.7% (n = 2/54) of all trials used mHealth for measuring both motor and non-motor symptoms, and 23.1% (n = 12/52) used mHealth for unsupervised, ecologic outcomes. Our findings suggest that mHealth remain underutilized and largely relegated to phase 2 trials for secondary or tertiary outcome measures. Efforts toward greater alignment of mHealth with patient-centered outcomes and development of a universal, common-language platform to synchronize data from one or more devices will assist future efforts toward the integration of mHealth into clinical trials.
Implementation of Mobile Health Technologies in Clinical Trials of Movement Disorders: Underutilized Potential
Pilotto A.;Padovani A.;
2020-01-01
Abstract
Mobile health technologies (mHealth) are patient-worn or portable devices aimed at increasing the granularity and relevance of clinical measurements. The implementation of mHealth has the potential to decrease sample size, duration, and cost of clinical trials. We performed a review of the ClinicalTrials.gov database using a standardized approach to identify adoption in and usefulness of mHealth in movement disorders interventional clinical trials. Trial phase, geographical area, availability of data captured, constructs of interest, and outcome priority were collected. Eligible trials underwent quality appraisal using an ad hoc 5-point checklist to assess mHealth feasibility, acceptability, correlation with patient-centered outcome measures, and clinical meaningfulness. A total of 29% (n = 54/184) registered trials were using mHealth, mainly in Parkinson’s disease and essential tremor (59.3% and 27.8%). In most cases, mHealth were used in phase 2 trials (83.3%) as secondary outcome measures (59.3%). Only five phase 3 trials, representing 9.3% of the total, used mHealth (1 as primary outcome measure, 3 as secondary, and 1 as tertiary). Only 3.7% (n = 2/54) of all trials used mHealth for measuring both motor and non-motor symptoms, and 23.1% (n = 12/52) used mHealth for unsupervised, ecologic outcomes. Our findings suggest that mHealth remain underutilized and largely relegated to phase 2 trials for secondary or tertiary outcome measures. Efforts toward greater alignment of mHealth with patient-centered outcomes and development of a universal, common-language platform to synchronize data from one or more devices will assist future efforts toward the integration of mHealth into clinical trials.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
