Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
BackgroundCentre-PR may not be accessible for people living distant from PR centres. Remote digital PR may have equivalent benefits to centre-PR; however, previous trials were potentially biased towards digitally literate patients, and largely excluded participants with a preference for centre-PR. There is limited data on the real-world implementation of, and acceptability for, Digital-PR alone or as an adjunct to other models of PR.ObjectivesTo gather patients' views about the acceptability of Active+me REMOTE, a digital pulmonary rehabilitation app (Digital-PR).MethodsA qualitative exploratory study using semi-structured interviews with a subset (n = 15) of patients in a mixed method, feasibility study of a hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation, blending Digital-PR with other models of PR. Transcribed data were coded descriptively using Braun and Clarkes' methodology, data interpretation was facilitated through a Miro virtual whiteboard.ResultsThere was appreciation for the concept of Digital-PR, indicated by positive responses in the domains of "friends and family recommendation," "intention to continue using the app," and "privacy concerns." Benefits were reported by two participants who had declined centre-based PR. The app was rated low regarding user-friendliness. Challenges in understanding/using the app and a perception of challenges for others were reported and were associated with poor digital literacy and tech savviness. High digital skills did not predict a favourable assessment of the app as user-friendly.DiscussionWhilst there was a general appreciation for the concept of digital PR as an adjunct or alternative to traditional centre-based PR, the app did not appear to be user-friendly, nor acceptable to people with low digital literacy. The findings have implications for the wider routine implementation of Digital-PR.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12351072 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14799731251365632 | DOI Listing |