Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Hernia
Published in: Hernia 1/2020

01-02-2020 | Inguinal Hernia Surgery | Original Article

Perioperative monitoring of inguinal hernia patients with a smartphone application

Authors: L. van Hout, W. J. V. Bökkerink, M. S. Ibelings, P. W. H. E. Vriens

Published in: Hernia | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Patient Reported Outcomes have become standard in the evaluation of inguinal hernia repair. However, the chosen outcomes remain heterogeneous and the measurements time-consuming or inadequate. Perioperative measurement of pain and recovery could benefit from the contemporary possibilities that mobile health applications offer.

Methods

An application for smartphones and tablets was developed using the twitch crowdsourcing concept, classical questionnaires, experiences from randomised clinical trials, and patients’ input.

Results

Dichotomous questions and numeric rating scales, both pre- and post-operative, were implemented in the freely available Q1.6 application. Content, timing and frequencies were adapted to the inguinal hernia patient’s daily life and assumed recovery. Certain combinations of answers were set as alert notifications to detect adverse events. Data are displayed on a web-based dashboard enabling real-time monitoring. Legal aspects were examined and taken into account.

Discussion

The Q1.6 inguinal hernia app is an innovative tool for perioperative monitoring of pain and recovery of inguinal hernia patients. Previous limitations of classical measurements such as a large heterogeneity, retrospective data recording and different forms of bias can be eliminated. The `big data´ generated in this manner might be used for large-scale research to improve inguinal hernia surgery. The Q1.6 platform is not only hernia specific; it is also an innovative tool to measure PROs in any other domain.
Literature
1.
Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, Bouillot JL, Campanelli G, Conze J et al (2009) European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 13(4):343–403CrossRef
2.
3.
Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, Essink-Bot ML, Fekkes M, Sanderman R et al (1998) Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 Health Survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol 51(11):1055–1068CrossRef
4.
Heniford BT, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Novitsky YW, Hope WW, Kercher KW (2008) Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 206(4):638–644CrossRef
5.
Muysoms F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, DeBeaux AC, Dietz UA, Jeekel J et al (2012) EuraHS: the development of an international online platform for registration and outcome measurement of ventral abdominal wall hernia repair. Hernia 16(3):239–250CrossRef
6.
Muysoms FE, Vanlander A, Ceulemans R, Kyle-Leinhase I, Michiels M, Jacobs I et al (2016) A prospective, multicenter, observational study on quality of life after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with ProGrip laparoscopic, self-fixating mesh according to the European Registry for Abdominal Wall Hernias Quality of Life Instrument. Surgery 160(5):1344–1357CrossRef
7.
Staerkle RF, Villiger P (2011) Simple questionnaire for assessing core outcomes in inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 98(1):148–155CrossRef
8.
Kehlet H, Bay-Nielsen M, Kingsnorth A (2002) Chronic postherniorrhaphy pain—a call for uniform assessment. Hernia 6(4):178–181CrossRef
9.
Muysoms FE, Deerenberg EB, Peeters E, Agresta F, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G et al (2013) Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a Consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012. Hernia 17(4):423–433CrossRef
10.
Kehlet H, Roumen RM, Reinpold W, Miserez M (2013) Invited commentary: persistent pain after inguinal hernia repair: what do we know and what do we need to know? Hernia 17(3):293–297CrossRef
11.
Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D (2011) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 9(8):672–677CrossRef
12.
Kyle-Leinhase I, Kockerling F, Jorgensen LN, Montgomery A, Gillion JF, Rodriguez JAP et al (2018) Comparison of hernia registries: the CORE project. Hernia 22(4):561–575CrossRef
13.
Peyre H, Leplege A, Coste J (2011) Missing data methods for dealing with missing items in quality of life questionnaires A comparison by simulation of personal mean score, full information maximum likelihood, multiple imputation, and hot deck techniques applied to the SF-36 in the French 2003 decennial health survey. Qual Life Res 20(2):287–300CrossRef
14.
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903CrossRef
15.
16.
Waller A, Forshaw K, Carey M, Robinson S, Kerridge R, Proietto A et al (2015) Optimizing patient preparation and surgical experience using eHealth technology. JMIR Med Inform 3(3):e29CrossRef
17.
Semple JL, Sharpe S, Murnaghan ML, Theodoropoulos J, Metcalfe KA (2015) Using a mobile app for monitoring post-operative quality of recovery of patients at home: a feasibility study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 3(1):e18CrossRef
18.
Semple JL, Armstrong KA (2017) Mobile applications for postoperative monitoring after discharge. CMAJ 189(1):E22–E24CrossRef
19.
Russell TG, Buttrum P, Wootton R, Jull GA (2011) Internet-based outpatient telerehabilitation for patients following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(2):113–120CrossRef
20.
Armstrong KA, Semple JL, Coyte PC (2014) Replacing ambulatory surgical follow-up visits with mobile app home monitoring: modeling cost-effective scenarios. J Med Internet Res 16(9):e213CrossRef
21.
22.
23.
Vaish R, Wyngarden K, Chen J, Cheung B, Bernstein MS (2014) Twitch crowdsourcing: crowd contributions in short bursts of time. In: CHI ’14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: 2014 April 26; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. ACM, New York, p 3645–3654
24.
Oulasvirta A, Tamminen S, Roto V, Kuorelahti J (2005) Interaction in 4-second bursts: the fragmented nature of attentional resources in mobile HCI. In: CHI ’05: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: 2005 April 2–7; Portland, Oregon, USA. ACM, New York, p 919–928
25.
Falaki H, Mahajan R, Kandula S, Lymberopoulos D, Govindan R, Estrin D (2010) Diversity in Smartphone Usage. In: MobiSys ’10; Proceedings of the 8th international conference on mobile systems, applications, and services; 2019 Jun 15; San Francisco, California, USA. ACM, New York, p 179–194
26.
27.
Koning GG, Keus F, Koeslag L, Cheung CL, Avci M, van Laarhoven CJ et al (2012) Randomized clinical trial of chronic pain after the transinguinal preperitoneal technique compared with Lichtenstein's method for inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 99(10):1365–1373CrossRef
28.
Bokkerink WJV, Koning GG, Malagic D, van Hout L, van Laarhoven CJHM, Vriens PWHE (2019) Long-term results from a randomized comparison of open transinguinal preperitoneal hernia repair and the Lichtenstein method (TULIP trial). Br J Surg 106(7):856–861CrossRef
29.
Prins MW, Koning GG, Keus EF, Vriens PW, Mollen RM, Akkersdijk WL, et al. Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial for anterior inguinal hernia repair: transrectus sheath preperitoneal mesh repair compared to transinguinal preperitoneal procedure. Trials 2013 14:65–6215–14–65.CrossRef
30.
Bokkerink WJV, Koning GG, Vriens PWHE, de Vries J, van Laarhoven CJHM. Patients' perspective on inguinal hernia repair: a focus group study. Submitted for publication. 2019.
Metadata
Title
Perioperative monitoring of inguinal hernia patients with a smartphone application
Authors
L. van Hout
W. J. V. Bökkerink
M. S. Ibelings
P. W. H. E. Vriens
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer Paris
Published in
Hernia / Issue 1/2020
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02053-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Hernia 1/2020 Go to the issue

Original Article

Minimising recurrence after primary femoral hernia repair; is mesh mandatory?

Original Article

Comparing routine administrative data with registry data for assessing quality of hospital care in patients with inguinal hernia

Original Article

Effect of direct defect closure during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (“TEP/TAPP plus” technique) on post-operative outcomes

Original Article

Prevention of incisional hernia using different suture materials for closing the abdominal wall: a comparison of PDS, Vicryl and Prolene in a rat model

Original Article

Safety and efficacy of prophylactic resorbable biosynthetic mesh following midline laparotomy in clean/contemned field: preliminary results of a randomized double blind prospective trial

Case Report

Total extraperitoneal (TEP) management of mesh erosion into bladder following transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP)