Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 2, 72-9

Randomized, Cross-Over Evaluation of Mobile Phone vs Paper Diary in Subjects With Mild to Moderate Persistent Asthma

Affiliations

Randomized, Cross-Over Evaluation of Mobile Phone vs Paper Diary in Subjects With Mild to Moderate Persistent Asthma

Eli O Meltzer et al. Open Respir Med J.

Abstract

Diaries are frequently used to evaluate therapy. Forgetfulness, however, can lead to missed entries. With paper diaries, these missing entries can be backfilled, compromising the reasons for using a diary. Electronic diaries are a potential means of mitigating this limitation. The pilot study was conducted to evaluate use of a mobile phone diary. Twelve subjects with mild persistent asthma were randomly assigned to mobile or paper diary for 2 weeks and then crossed over to use the other diary type for next 2 weeks. Of the 12 subjects, 7 preferred the mobile diary. However, the mean prevalence of missing data was greater when using the mobile (18% ± 9%) compared to paper diary (9% ± 4%; P = 0.05). In conclusion, the mobile diary was preferred by slightly more subjects. The greater prevalence of missing data when using this diary most likely results from the inability to backfill missing entries.

Trial registration: Clintrials.gov NCT00367263 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00367263).

Figures

Fig. (1).
Fig. (1).
Traditional paper diary used in the current evaluation.
Fig. (2).
Fig. (2).
Screens (A through F) of the VOCEL® Mobile Diary as configured for the current evaluation.
Fig. (3).
Fig. (3).
Prevalence of baseline change in FEV1 over each 2 week treatment period by diary type.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 8 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma (EPR-3). National Institutes of Health [monograph on the Internet] Available from: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/asthma/ [19 Oct 2007]. 28 Aug 2007.
    1. Global Initiative For Asthma (GINA) Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention. Global Initiative For Asthma [monograph on the Internet] Available from: http://www.ginasthma.org . 2006. [19 Oct 2007].
    1. Boulet LP, Drollmann A, Magyar P, et al. Comparative efficacy of once-daily ciclesonide and budesonide in the treatment of persistent asthma. Respir Med. 2006;100:785–94. - PubMed
    1. Adachi M, Ishihara K, Inoue H, et al. Efficacy and safety of inhaled ciclesonide compared with chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone dipropionate in adults with moderate to severe persistent asthma. Respirology. 2007;12:573–80. - PubMed
    1. Hansel TT, Benezet O, Kafe H, et al. A multinational, 12-week, randomized study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of ciclesonide and budesonide in patients with asthma. Clin Ther. 2006;28:906–20. - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback