Self‐supporting wound care mobile applications for nurses: A scoping review

Abstract

AbstractAimThis study provides an overview of the literature to identify and map the types of available evidence on self‐supporting mobile applications used by nurses in wound care regarding their development, evaluation and outcomes for patients, nurses and the healthcare system.DesignScoping review.Review MethodJoanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology was used.Data SourcesA search was performed using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (via EBSCO), Web of Science, LiSSa (Littérature Scientifique en Santé), Cochrane Wounds, Érudit and grey literature, between April and October 2022, updated in April 2023, to identify literature published in English and French.ResultsEleven studies from 14 publications met the inclusion criteria. Mostly descriptive, the included studies presented mobile applications that nurses used, among other things, to assess wounds and support clinical decision‐making. The results described how nurses were iteratively involved in the process of developing and evaluating mobile applications using various methods such as pilot tests. The three outcomes most frequently reported by nurses were as follows: facilitating care, documentation on file and access to evidence‐based data.ConclusionThe potential of mobile applications in wound care is within reach. Nurses are an indispensable player in the successful development of these tools.Implications for the Profession and Patient CareIf properly developed and evaluated, mobile applications for wound care could enhance nursing practices and improve patient care. The development of ethical digital competence must be ensured during initial training and continued throughout the professional journey.ImpactWe identified a dearth of studies investigating applications that work without Internet access. More research is needed on the development of mobile applications in wound care and their possible impact on nursing practice in rural areas and the next generation of nurses.Reporting MethodThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis Extension for Scoping Review guidelines were used.Patient or Public ContributionNo patient or public contribution.