Evidence-Based Review of Smartphone Versus Paper Asthma Action Plans on Asthma Control

Abstract

Objective: To summarize and evaluate existing literature regarding the impact of mobile asthma action plans (MAAPs) versus written asthma action plans (WAAPs) on degree of asthma control. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (2000-January 2019) using the term asthma action plan with each of the following: smartphone, computers, handheld, mobile applications, portable electronic application, portable software application, tablet, or technology. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The search was limited to cohort and randomized controlled trials examining MAAP versus WAAP data. Data extracted included the following: study design, population, intervention, control, outcomes related to asthma control, and potential biases assessed using Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data Synthesis: Four of the 41 studies identified were included, each of which were randomized control trials. One study showed significant improvement using a non–asthma-specific assessment tool, 1 study showed improvement only for patients with uncontrolled asthma at baseline, and 2 studies showed no difference in asthma control scores. Overall risk of bias across all studies was low to moderate. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Health care providers should select an asthma action plan (AAP) format based on what the patient is most likely to understand and consistently use. Conclusions: Because of conflicting published data regarding the use of MAAPs versus WAAPs and risk of bias, it is unclear at this time whether one format of AAP is superior to the other for either adolescents or adults.