Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?
Abstract Background Formulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans. Objectives Compare conventional and app‐guided fluid therapy plans...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2022-11-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.16526 |
| _version_ | 1828086652361244672 |
|---|---|
| author | Simona Aukse Zduoba John House Sam Rowe |
| author_facet | Simona Aukse Zduoba John House Sam Rowe |
| author_sort | Simona Aukse Zduoba |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Formulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans. Objectives Compare conventional and app‐guided fluid therapy plans for simulated cases of neonatal calf diarrhea. Participants Third and fourth year veterinary students (n = 55) from The University of Sydney. Methods We developed a web app to assist fluid therapy formulation (http://calfaid.com) that was evaluated in a randomized case simulation trial. Participants were instructed to perform fluid therapy calculations and formulate an integrated fluid therapy plan for case scenarios using conventional methods and using the fluid therapy app. Responses were scored by a blinded study investigator using an a priori scoring guide and groups (conventional vs. app‐guided) were compared using linear mixed models. Results On average, total scores for app‐guided fluid therapy calculations were 20.6% points higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.1‐27.1) than calculations completed using the conventional method (88.2% vs. 67.5%, respectively). On average, total scores for app‐guided integrated fluid therapy plans were 14.2% points higher (95% CI, 6.3‐22.2; 65.8% vs. 51.2%). Eighty percent of respondents indicated they would prefer to use the app‐guided method over the conventional method. Conclusion and Clinical Importance Our findings suggest that fluid therapy plans can be improved using apps. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T04:58:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-fb3fa407d9a4487a938be9158aa4c5cc |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0891-6640 1939-1676 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T04:58:16Z |
| publishDate | 2022-11-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine |
| spelling | doaj.art-fb3fa407d9a4487a938be9158aa4c5cc2022-12-26T07:32:23ZengWileyJournal of Veterinary Internal Medicine0891-66401939-16762022-11-013662079208710.1111/jvim.16526Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?Simona Aukse Zduoba0John House1Sam Rowe2Sydney School of Veterinary Science The University of Sydney Camden New South Wales AustraliaSydney School of Veterinary Science The University of Sydney Camden New South Wales AustraliaSydney School of Veterinary Science The University of Sydney Camden New South Wales AustraliaAbstract Background Formulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans. Objectives Compare conventional and app‐guided fluid therapy plans for simulated cases of neonatal calf diarrhea. Participants Third and fourth year veterinary students (n = 55) from The University of Sydney. Methods We developed a web app to assist fluid therapy formulation (http://calfaid.com) that was evaluated in a randomized case simulation trial. Participants were instructed to perform fluid therapy calculations and formulate an integrated fluid therapy plan for case scenarios using conventional methods and using the fluid therapy app. Responses were scored by a blinded study investigator using an a priori scoring guide and groups (conventional vs. app‐guided) were compared using linear mixed models. Results On average, total scores for app‐guided fluid therapy calculations were 20.6% points higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.1‐27.1) than calculations completed using the conventional method (88.2% vs. 67.5%, respectively). On average, total scores for app‐guided integrated fluid therapy plans were 14.2% points higher (95% CI, 6.3‐22.2; 65.8% vs. 51.2%). Eighty percent of respondents indicated they would prefer to use the app‐guided method over the conventional method. Conclusion and Clinical Importance Our findings suggest that fluid therapy plans can be improved using apps.https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.16526appdiarrheafluid therapyveterinary medicine |
| spellingShingle | Simona Aukse Zduoba John House Sam Rowe Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine app diarrhea fluid therapy veterinary medicine |
| title | Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? |
| title_full | Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? |
| title_fullStr | Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? |
| title_short | Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine? |
| title_sort | can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine |
| topic | app diarrhea fluid therapy veterinary medicine |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.16526 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT simonaauksezduoba canappsbeusedtoformulatefluidtherapyplansinveterinarymedicine AT johnhouse canappsbeusedtoformulatefluidtherapyplansinveterinarymedicine AT samrowe canappsbeusedtoformulatefluidtherapyplansinveterinarymedicine |