ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2024
[Attitudes toward digital tools in pain medicine : Survey of German Pain Society health professional members and members of self-help groups].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medical App Treatment of Non-Specific Low Back Pain in the 12-month Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial Rise-uP: Where Clinical Superiority Meets Cost Savings.Journal of pain research · 2024Trial
- One year of digital health applications (DiGA) in Germany - Rheumatologists' perspectives.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital medicine has increasing influence on the German healthcare system. In times of social distancing during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, digital tools enable health professionals to maintain medical care. Furthermore, digital elements have potential to provide effective guideline-oriented treatment to a broad range of patients independently from location and time. This survey was used to assess the attitudes of members of the German Pain Society (health professionals) and of associated self-help groups (patients) towards digital medicine. It was sent out as an online survey to health professionals in September 2020 and to patients in February 2021. The survey referred especially to present usage, attitude and potential concerns regarding particular digital elements. Furthermore, technical affinity was assessed. In total, 250 health professionals and 154 patients participated in the survey. The results show that-although digital elements are already known-a substantial proportion of health professionals still lack broad transfer to regular treatment. The potential of digital tools seems to be recognized by both groups; interestingly, patients consider digital medicine as more useful than health professionals. Nevertheless, concerns about for example data security or digital competence remain in both groups. Taken together, our results indicate that disruptive changes, as the implementation of digital medicine in the healthcare system, have to be guided by intense education and channeled by political policies in order to successfully integrate digital elements into medicine on a long-term basis. This would be in favor for all involved parties and is demanded especially by patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.