Tag Archives: Physicians (DO)

Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

Posted on by

Post image for Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

In the bygone years prior to the dawn of mobile devices, students and residents were sent into the intellectual battlefields that are the wards of the hospital, armed with little more than a stethoscope as their weapon, and a white coat as their armour.

While white coats don’t offer much protection against the sting of a preceptor’s difficult “pimp” questions or the weariness of frequent electrolyte abnormality pages, they do offer trainees a valuable commodity: pocket space.

Though we are now able to cram a virtually unlimited amount of information into our pockets via our mobile devices, just a few short years ago, pocket books and pocket cards were the weapons of choice. There were few weapons more efficient than a well-designed set of pocket cards; they were a potent combination of critical information presented in a compact package available for extremely quick reference.

But times change, and white coat real estate is increasingly occupied by mobile technology. I admittedly do find pocket cards to be quicker in terms of looking up critical information at times, but as one begins carrying multiple pocket cards, this speed advantage is lost. There is only a finite space available, and mobile devices are increasingly being tapped to fulfill this role.

In a bid to stay on top of trends, Borm Bruckmeier has translated their Wards 101 Essentials Pocketcard Set, which covers common emergency, internal medicine, and ICU topics, to the iPhone and iPad via a universal iOS app.

The Wards 101 i-pocketcards app is a straight digital conversion of the physical cards. There is a “classic view” available for users to view the cards in their original white coat form. The iPad is naturally better suited to displaying the cards in classic view, while the iPhone version will necessitate cumbersome zooming in and out to achieve a legible image size.

All 10 faces of the pocket card set are present in the app.

IMG_0930_alt
IMG_0121_alt

Luckily, the app doesn’t stop at just being a glorified pdf version of the original cards. The developers have broken down the information into categories that one can browse in the “table of contents” section. Selecting a section will display the information in a screen-optimized format that eliminates the need for cumbersome zooming, even on an iPhone screen.

IMG_0934_alt
IMG_0933_alt
IMG_0122_alt

While pocketcards are by nature largely not particularly interactive, the developers have tried to increase the functionality of the app by adding buttons to the SLUMS exam, so that one can administer the exam while inputting the scores while the app calculates a total score.

IMG_0123_alt

Overall, Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a good digital conversion of the physical set of reference cards. All the critical information found in the physical cards is present and accounted for.

However, the problems that plague the conversion of handbooks to electronic form still exist here. As addressed by us in previous reviews and commentary, these include issues about the relatively small amount of information in these apps compared to the amount of information that can possibly be packed into the digital format.

Other issues include the downward pressure on App Store prices and Apple’s 30% cut on every transaction, affecting every publisher’s bottom line. To the developers’ credit, they have priced the app at $5.99, which is cheaper than what I have seen in stores ($14.99).

The information presented in this app is nice and condensed; I could definitely imagine myself carrying it with me on an internal medicine, emergency or critical care rotation. The choice between the physical or digital version is solely up to personal preference, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages of both.

If in doubt, a visit to a medical bookstore allows one to skim over all the charts, formulae and content contained within the app, and also helps one to decide whether a physical or digital version is best suited to one’s individual needs.

Likes:

  • Concise collection of important information needed on the wards
  • Priced below that of the physical reference cards

Dislikes:

  • While the presented content is very important, its scope is limited to that of the physical reference cards

Price:

  • $5.99

Conclusion:

  • Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a digital conversion of the physical reference cards; choice of a version will depend on individual preference.

iTunes Link

Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

Posted on by

Post image for Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

In the bygone years prior to the dawn of mobile devices, students and residents were sent into the intellectual battlefields that are the wards of the hospital, armed with little more than a stethoscope as their weapon, and a white coat as their armour.

While white coats don’t offer much protection against the sting of a preceptor’s difficult “pimp” questions or the weariness of frequent electrolyte abnormality pages, they do offer trainees a valuable commodity: pocket space.

Though we are now able to cram a virtually unlimited amount of information into our pockets via our mobile devices, just a few short years ago, pocket books and pocket cards were the weapons of choice. There were few weapons more efficient than a well-designed set of pocket cards; they were a potent combination of critical information presented in a compact package available for extremely quick reference.

But times change, and white coat real estate is increasingly occupied by mobile technology. I admittedly do find pocket cards to be quicker in terms of looking up critical information at times, but as one begins carrying multiple pocket cards, this speed advantage is lost. There is only a finite space available, and mobile devices are increasingly being tapped to fulfill this role.

In a bid to stay on top of trends, Borm Bruckmeier has translated their Wards 101 Essentials Pocketcard Set, which covers common emergency, internal medicine, and ICU topics, to the iPhone and iPad via a universal iOS app.

The Wards 101 i-pocketcards app is a straight digital conversion of the physical cards. There is a “classic view” available for users to view the cards in their original white coat form. The iPad is naturally better suited to displaying the cards in classic view, while the iPhone version will necessitate cumbersome zooming in and out to achieve a legible image size.

All 10 faces of the pocket card set are present in the app.

IMG_0930_alt
IMG_0121_alt

Luckily, the app doesn’t stop at just being a glorified pdf version of the original cards. The developers have broken down the information into categories that one can browse in the “table of contents” section. Selecting a section will display the information in a screen-optimized format that eliminates the need for cumbersome zooming, even on an iPhone screen.

IMG_0934_alt
IMG_0933_alt
IMG_0122_alt

While pocketcards are by nature largely not particularly interactive, the developers have tried to increase the functionality of the app by adding buttons to the SLUMS exam, so that one can administer the exam while inputting the scores while the app calculates a total score.

IMG_0123_alt

Overall, Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a good digital conversion of the physical set of reference cards. All the critical information found in the physical cards is present and accounted for.

However, the problems that plague the conversion of handbooks to electronic form still exist here. As addressed by us in previous reviews and commentary, these include issues about the relatively small amount of information in these apps compared to the amount of information that can possibly be packed into the digital format.

Other issues include the downward pressure on App Store prices and Apple’s 30% cut on every transaction, affecting every publisher’s bottom line. To the developers’ credit, they have priced the app at $5.99, which is cheaper than what I have seen in stores ($14.99).

The information presented in this app is nice and condensed; I could definitely imagine myself carrying it with me on an internal medicine, emergency or critical care rotation. The choice between the physical or digital version is solely up to personal preference, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages of both.

If in doubt, a visit to a medical bookstore allows one to skim over all the charts, formulae and content contained within the app, and also helps one to decide whether a physical or digital version is best suited to one’s individual needs.

Likes:

  • Concise collection of important information needed on the wards
  • Priced below that of the physical reference cards

Dislikes:

  • While the presented content is very important, its scope is limited to that of the physical reference cards

Price:

  • $5.99

Conclusion:

  • Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a digital conversion of the physical reference cards; choice of a version will depend on individual preference.

iTunes Link

Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

Posted on by

Post image for Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

In the bygone years prior to the dawn of mobile devices, students and residents were sent into the intellectual battlefields that are the wards of the hospital, armed with little more than a stethoscope as their weapon, and a white coat as their armour.

While white coats don’t offer much protection against the sting of a preceptor’s difficult “pimp” questions or the weariness of frequent electrolyte abnormality pages, they do offer trainees a valuable commodity: pocket space.

Though we are now able to cram a virtually unlimited amount of information into our pockets via our mobile devices, just a few short years ago, pocket books and pocket cards were the weapons of choice. There were few weapons more efficient than a well-designed set of pocket cards; they were a potent combination of critical information presented in a compact package available for extremely quick reference.

But times change, and white coat real estate is increasingly occupied by mobile technology. I admittedly do find pocket cards to be quicker in terms of looking up critical information at times, but as one begins carrying multiple pocket cards, this speed advantage is lost. There is only a finite space available, and mobile devices are increasingly being tapped to fulfill this role.

In a bid to stay on top of trends, Borm Bruckmeier has translated their Wards 101 Essentials Pocketcard Set, which covers common emergency, internal medicine, and ICU topics, to the iPhone and iPad via a universal iOS app.

The Wards 101 i-pocketcards app is a straight digital conversion of the physical cards. There is a “classic view” available for users to view the cards in their original white coat form. The iPad is naturally better suited to displaying the cards in classic view, while the iPhone version will necessitate cumbersome zooming in and out to achieve a legible image size.

All 10 faces of the pocket card set are present in the app.

IMG_0930_alt
IMG_0121_alt

Luckily, the app doesn’t stop at just being a glorified pdf version of the original cards. The developers have broken down the information into categories that one can browse in the “table of contents” section. Selecting a section will display the information in a screen-optimized format that eliminates the need for cumbersome zooming, even on an iPhone screen.

IMG_0934_alt
IMG_0933_alt
IMG_0122_alt

While pocketcards are by nature largely not particularly interactive, the developers have tried to increase the functionality of the app by adding buttons to the SLUMS exam, so that one can administer the exam while inputting the scores while the app calculates a total score.

IMG_0123_alt

Overall, Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a good digital conversion of the physical set of reference cards. All the critical information found in the physical cards is present and accounted for.

However, the problems that plague the conversion of handbooks to electronic form still exist here. As addressed by us in previous reviews and commentary, these include issues about the relatively small amount of information in these apps compared to the amount of information that can possibly be packed into the digital format.

Other issues include the downward pressure on App Store prices and Apple’s 30% cut on every transaction, affecting every publisher’s bottom line. To the developers’ credit, they have priced the app at $5.99, which is cheaper than what I have seen in stores ($14.99).

The information presented in this app is nice and condensed; I could definitely imagine myself carrying it with me on an internal medicine, emergency or critical care rotation. The choice between the physical or digital version is solely up to personal preference, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages of both.

If in doubt, a visit to a medical bookstore allows one to skim over all the charts, formulae and content contained within the app, and also helps one to decide whether a physical or digital version is best suited to one’s individual needs.

Likes:

  • Concise collection of important information needed on the wards
  • Priced below that of the physical reference cards

Dislikes:

  • While the presented content is very important, its scope is limited to that of the physical reference cards

Price:

  • $5.99

Conclusion:

  • Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a digital conversion of the physical reference cards; choice of a version will depend on individual preference.

iTunes Link

Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

Posted on by

Post image for Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

In the bygone years prior to the dawn of mobile devices, students and residents were sent into the intellectual battlefields that are the wards of the hospital, armed with little more than a stethoscope as their weapon, and a white coat as their armour.

While white coats don’t offer much protection against the sting of a preceptor’s difficult “pimp” questions or the weariness of frequent electrolyte abnormality pages, they do offer trainees a valuable commodity: pocket space.

Though we are now able to cram a virtually unlimited amount of information into our pockets via our mobile devices, just a few short years ago, pocket books and pocket cards were the weapons of choice. There were few weapons more efficient than a well-designed set of pocket cards; they were a potent combination of critical information presented in a compact package available for extremely quick reference.

But times change, and white coat real estate is increasingly occupied by mobile technology. I admittedly do find pocket cards to be quicker in terms of looking up critical information at times, but as one begins carrying multiple pocket cards, this speed advantage is lost. There is only a finite space available, and mobile devices are increasingly being tapped to fulfill this role.

In a bid to stay on top of trends, Borm Bruckmeier has translated their Wards 101 Essentials Pocketcard Set, which covers common emergency, internal medicine, and ICU topics, to the iPhone and iPad via a universal iOS app.

The Wards 101 i-pocketcards app is a straight digital conversion of the physical cards. There is a “classic view” available for users to view the cards in their original white coat form. The iPad is naturally better suited to displaying the cards in classic view, while the iPhone version will necessitate cumbersome zooming in and out to achieve a legible image size.

All 10 faces of the pocket card set are present in the app.

IMG_0930_alt
IMG_0121_alt

Luckily, the app doesn’t stop at just being a glorified pdf version of the original cards. The developers have broken down the information into categories that one can browse in the “table of contents” section. Selecting a section will display the information in a screen-optimized format that eliminates the need for cumbersome zooming, even on an iPhone screen.

IMG_0934_alt
IMG_0933_alt
IMG_0122_alt

While pocketcards are by nature largely not particularly interactive, the developers have tried to increase the functionality of the app by adding buttons to the SLUMS exam, so that one can administer the exam while inputting the scores while the app calculates a total score.

IMG_0123_alt

Overall, Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a good digital conversion of the physical set of reference cards. All the critical information found in the physical cards is present and accounted for.

However, the problems that plague the conversion of handbooks to electronic form still exist here. As addressed by us in previous reviews and commentary, these include issues about the relatively small amount of information in these apps compared to the amount of information that can possibly be packed into the digital format.

Other issues include the downward pressure on App Store prices and Apple’s 30% cut on every transaction, affecting every publisher’s bottom line. To the developers’ credit, they have priced the app at $5.99, which is cheaper than what I have seen in stores ($14.99).

The information presented in this app is nice and condensed; I could definitely imagine myself carrying it with me on an internal medicine, emergency or critical care rotation. The choice between the physical or digital version is solely up to personal preference, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages of both.

If in doubt, a visit to a medical bookstore allows one to skim over all the charts, formulae and content contained within the app, and also helps one to decide whether a physical or digital version is best suited to one’s individual needs.

Likes:

  • Concise collection of important information needed on the wards
  • Priced below that of the physical reference cards

Dislikes:

  • While the presented content is very important, its scope is limited to that of the physical reference cards

Price:

  • $5.99

Conclusion:

  • Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a digital conversion of the physical reference cards; choice of a version will depend on individual preference.

iTunes Link

Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

Posted on by

Post image for Medical App that replaces the reference cards in your white coat, Wards 101 i-pocketcards review

In the bygone years prior to the dawn of mobile devices, students and residents were sent into the intellectual battlefields that are the wards of the hospital, armed with little more than a stethoscope as their weapon, and a white coat as their armour.

While white coats don’t offer much protection against the sting of a preceptor’s difficult “pimp” questions or the weariness of frequent electrolyte abnormality pages, they do offer trainees a valuable commodity: pocket space.

Though we are now able to cram a virtually unlimited amount of information into our pockets via our mobile devices, just a few short years ago, pocket books and pocket cards were the weapons of choice. There were few weapons more efficient than a well-designed set of pocket cards; they were a potent combination of critical information presented in a compact package available for extremely quick reference.

But times change, and white coat real estate is increasingly occupied by mobile technology. I admittedly do find pocket cards to be quicker in terms of looking up critical information at times, but as one begins carrying multiple pocket cards, this speed advantage is lost. There is only a finite space available, and mobile devices are increasingly being tapped to fulfill this role.

In a bid to stay on top of trends, Borm Bruckmeier has translated their Wards 101 Essentials Pocketcard Set, which covers common emergency, internal medicine, and ICU topics, to the iPhone and iPad via a universal iOS app.

The Wards 101 i-pocketcards app is a straight digital conversion of the physical cards. There is a “classic view” available for users to view the cards in their original white coat form. The iPad is naturally better suited to displaying the cards in classic view, while the iPhone version will necessitate cumbersome zooming in and out to achieve a legible image size.

All 10 faces of the pocket card set are present in the app.

IMG_0930_alt
IMG_0121_alt

Luckily, the app doesn’t stop at just being a glorified pdf version of the original cards. The developers have broken down the information into categories that one can browse in the “table of contents” section. Selecting a section will display the information in a screen-optimized format that eliminates the need for cumbersome zooming, even on an iPhone screen.

IMG_0934_alt
IMG_0933_alt
IMG_0122_alt

While pocketcards are by nature largely not particularly interactive, the developers have tried to increase the functionality of the app by adding buttons to the SLUMS exam, so that one can administer the exam while inputting the scores while the app calculates a total score.

IMG_0123_alt

Overall, Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a good digital conversion of the physical set of reference cards. All the critical information found in the physical cards is present and accounted for.

However, the problems that plague the conversion of handbooks to electronic form still exist here. As addressed by us in previous reviews and commentary, these include issues about the relatively small amount of information in these apps compared to the amount of information that can possibly be packed into the digital format.

Other issues include the downward pressure on App Store prices and Apple’s 30% cut on every transaction, affecting every publisher’s bottom line. To the developers’ credit, they have priced the app at $5.99, which is cheaper than what I have seen in stores ($14.99).

The information presented in this app is nice and condensed; I could definitely imagine myself carrying it with me on an internal medicine, emergency or critical care rotation. The choice between the physical or digital version is solely up to personal preference, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages of both.

If in doubt, a visit to a medical bookstore allows one to skim over all the charts, formulae and content contained within the app, and also helps one to decide whether a physical or digital version is best suited to one’s individual needs.

Likes:

  • Concise collection of important information needed on the wards
  • Priced below that of the physical reference cards

Dislikes:

  • While the presented content is very important, its scope is limited to that of the physical reference cards

Price:

  • $5.99

Conclusion:

  • Wards 101 i-pocketcards is a digital conversion of the physical reference cards; choice of a version will depend on individual preference.

iTunes Link

Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

Posted on by

[Ed. Note: This post will be part of an ongoing series on the efforts of the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine program to go mobile. Given that Dr. Misra (iMedicalApps senior editor) is part of this effort, we will be able to share an honest, insider perspective that can help others learn from the Hopkins experience. Not only was this permitted by the Hopkins program leadership, it was embraced, and for that we are grateful. ]

Medical training is currently undergoing a dramatic change. Duty hour reforms, increasing financial and regulatory demands, and a healthcare system at the center of a political battle are among the extraordinary pressures being exerted on the traditional training model.

These pressures require that training programs at all levels – from medical school to the most sub-specialized fellowships – rethink how we do pretty much everything.

Recently, the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency program distributed iPads to its housestaff as part of an effort to do just that. The aims of the program are quite broad – to increase the efficiency of in-hospital care, enhance clinical training of residents, improve patient-physician communication, and more.

The mobile platform is relatively young in terms of its utilization in healthcare and many of the potential applications, benefits, and pitfalls remain to be discovered. As this program continues to grow and evolve, iMedicalApps will continue to share the the insider perspective on the Hopkins experience as part of our shared desire to drive this process forward. In this first installment, we’ll start by addressing the question – why the iPad?

Why the iPad

There are many tablet’s out there that are similar, and in some ways, better than the iPad. In fact, Apple is in a legal dispute with Samsung because they claim the Galaxy tab is a repackaged iPad. And the question certainly came up – why not go with another tablet? Android is arguably a more malleable platform than iOS, many of the tablets are cheaper, and there are many more options.  We’ve had great debates on iMedicalApps in the past about this subject.

Here are a few reasons why we went with the iPad.

The iPad has a head start

When looking to launch a mobile platform, you have to consider your audience. And in any clinical practice, that will include a range of familiarity with consumer technologies, specifically in this case tablets. Among those that were already using tablets, all of them were using iPads. That simple detail confers a number of advantages.

First, with the iPad, we have a group of individuals who are already “embedded” within the our audience. So not only had their use of the device already piqued the interest of others, they also were engaged in this program from the beginning. After launch, these individuals can provide both formal and informal help to colleagues who are less familiar with the device and platform.

Second, in terms of program planning and development, we already had a wealth of experience due to using the iPad in our own institution. These early adopters had already problem-solved a number of issues, found some of the potential efficiencies to be gained, and even identified potential new applications and enhancements.

Third, the launch of the iPad program at the University of Chicago was certainly helpful as their program leadership was quite forthcoming with their own experiences.

The choice Android offers wasn’t all that helpful

Choice is a great thing for the average consumer, but not necessarily for an enterprise. In considering Android as an option, several issues arose that led us to conclude that the iPad was the best choice.  One of the main issues — choosing an Android device involves several extra steps.

First, we would likely order a few different devices, test them out, and then, for practical reasons, probably pick one device. Picking more than one would complicate everything from picking accessories to device management by the IT folks. And if were going to choose a single device in the end, then the value of choice for individual housestaff is ultimately lost anyways.

Another argument could be made that Android potentially offers cost-savings in comparison to the iPad. However, we determined early on that we didn’t need the 3G connectivity nor did we need the 32gb memory. Our application of the device is primarily for in-hospital use where WiFi connectivity is available – this makes the 16gb WiFi iPad the natural choice and very competitive in terms of pricing, roughly $500.00.

What about apps?

Apps are a big part of success of any mobile platform. We’ve talked before about how their absence in the Blackberry and Windows environments are an Achille’s heel for those platforms. However, the difference between iPad and Android apps did not end up being a significant factor in the selection of the iPad as our platform of choice.

Perhaps it was the sense of parity between iPad and Android, given that most major apps are available on both. Additionally, the issue of app compatibility across different Android devices was less of a concern since we would most likely only be dealing with one Android device anyways.

These reasons, among others, were major drivers in our selection of the iPad as the platform of choice in our efforts to go mobile. Please share your thoughts and experiences below as we’d love to hear and learn from other efforts.


Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

Posted on by

Post image for Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

[Ed. Note: This post will be part of an ongoing series on the efforts of the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine program to go mobile. Given that Dr. Misra (iMedicalApps senior editor) is part of this effort, we will be able to share an honest, insider perspective that can help others learn from the Hopkins experience. Not only was this permitted by the Hopkins program leadership, it was embraced, and for that we are grateful. ]

Medical training is currently undergoing a dramatic change. Duty hour reforms, increasing financial and regulatory demands, and a healthcare system at the center of a political battle are among the extraordinary pressures being exerted on the traditional training model.

These pressures require that training programs at all levels – from medical school to the most sub-specialized fellowships – rethink how we do pretty much everything.

Recently, the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency program distributed iPads to its housestaff as part of an effort to do just that. The aims of the program are quite broad – to increase the efficiency of in-hospital care, enhance clinical training of residents, improve patient-physician communication, and more.

The mobile platform is relatively young in terms of its utilization in healthcare and many of the potential applications, benefits, and pitfalls remain to be discovered. As this program continues to grow and evolve, iMedicalApps will continue to share the the insider perspective on the Hopkins experience as part of our shared desire to drive this process forward. In this first installment, we’ll start by addressing the question – why the iPad?

Why the iPad

There are many tablet’s out there that are similar, and in some ways, better than the iPad. In fact, Apple is in a legal dispute with Samsung because they claim the Galaxy tab is a repackaged iPad. And the question certainly came up – why not go with another tablet? Android is arguably a more malleable platform than iOS, many of the tablets are cheaper, and there are many more options.  We’ve had great debates on iMedicalApps in the past about this subject.

Here are a few reasons why we went with the iPad.

The iPad has a head start

When looking to launch a mobile platform, you have to consider your audience. And in any clinical practice, that will include a range of familiarity with consumer technologies, specifically in this case tablets. Among those that were already using tablets, all of them were using iPads. That simple detail confers a number of advantages.

First, with the iPad, we have a group of individuals who are already “embedded” within the our audience. So not only had their use of the device already piqued the interest of others, they also were engaged in this program from the beginning. After launch, these individuals can provide both formal and informal help to colleagues who are less familiar with the device and platform.

Second, in terms of program planning and development, we already had a wealth of experience due to using the iPad in our own institution. These early adopters had already problem-solved a number of issues, found some of the potential efficiencies to be gained, and even identified potential new applications and enhancements.

Third, the launch of the iPad program at the University of Chicago was certainly helpful as their program leadership was quite forthcoming with their own experiences.

The choice Android offers wasn’t all that helpful

Choice is a great thing for the average consumer, but not necessarily for an enterprise. In considering Android as an option, several issues arose that led us to conclude that the iPad was the best choice.  One of the main issues — choosing an Android device involves several extra steps.

First, we would likely order a few different devices, test them out, and then, for practical reasons, probably pick one device. Picking more than one would complicate everything from picking accessories to device management by the IT folks. And if were going to choose a single device in the end, then the value of choice for individual housestaff is ultimately lost anyways.

Another argument could be made that Android potentially offers cost-savings in comparison to the iPad. However, we determined early on that we didn’t need the 3G connectivity nor did we need the 32gb memory. Our application of the device is primarily for in-hospital use where WiFi connectivity is available – this makes the 16gb WiFi iPad the natural choice and very competitive in terms of pricing, roughly $500.00.

What about apps?

Apps are a big part of success of any mobile platform. We’ve talked before about how their absence in the Blackberry and Windows environments are an Achille’s heel for those platforms. However, the difference between iPad and Android apps did not end up being a significant factor in the selection of the iPad as our platform of choice.

Perhaps it was the sense of parity between iPad and Android, given that most major apps are available on both. Additionally, the issue of app compatibility across different Android devices was less of a concern since we would most likely only be dealing with one Android device anyways.

These reasons, among others, were major drivers in our selection of the iPad as the platform of choice in our efforts to go mobile. Please share your thoughts and experiences below as we’d love to hear and learn from other efforts.

Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

Posted on by

Post image for Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

[Ed. Note: This post will be part of an ongoing series on the efforts of the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine program to go mobile. Given that Dr. Misra (iMedicalApps senior editor) is part of this effort, we will be able to share an honest, insider perspective that can help others learn from the Hopkins experience. Not only was this permitted by the Hopkins program leadership, it was embraced, and for that we are grateful. ]

Medical training is currently undergoing a dramatic change. Duty hour reforms, increasing financial and regulatory demands, and a healthcare system at the center of a political battle are among the extraordinary pressures being exerted on the traditional training model.

These pressures require that training programs at all levels – from medical school to the most sub-specialized fellowships – rethink how we do pretty much everything.

Recently, the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency program distributed iPads to its housestaff as part of an effort to do just that. The aims of the program are quite broad – to increase the efficiency of in-hospital care, enhance clinical training of residents, improve patient-physician communication, and more.

The mobile platform is relatively young in terms of its utilization in healthcare and many of the potential applications, benefits, and pitfalls remain to be discovered. As this program continues to grow and evolve, iMedicalApps will continue to share the the insider perspective on the Hopkins experience as part of our shared desire to drive this process forward. In this first installment, we’ll start by addressing the question – why the iPad?

Why the iPad

There are many tablet’s out there that are similar, and in some ways, better than the iPad. In fact, Apple is in a legal dispute with Samsung because they claim the Galaxy tab is a repackaged iPad. And the question certainly came up – why not go with another tablet? Android is arguably a more malleable platform than iOS, many of the tablets are cheaper, and there are many more options.  We’ve had great debates on iMedicalApps in the past about this subject.

Here are a few reasons why we went with the iPad.

The iPad has a head start

When looking to launch a mobile platform, you have to consider your audience. And in any clinical practice, that will include a range of familiarity with consumer technologies, specifically in this case tablets. Among those that were already using tablets, all of them were using iPads. That simple detail confers a number of advantages.

First, with the iPad, we have a group of individuals who are already “embedded” within the our audience. So not only had their use of the device already piqued the interest of others, they also were engaged in this program from the beginning. After launch, these individuals can provide both formal and informal help to colleagues who are less familiar with the device and platform.

Second, in terms of program planning and development, we already had a wealth of experience due to using the iPad in our own institution. These early adopters had already problem-solved a number of issues, found some of the potential efficiencies to be gained, and even identified potential new applications and enhancements.

Third, the launch of the iPad program at the University of Chicago was certainly helpful as their program leadership was quite forthcoming with their own experiences.

The choice Android offers wasn’t all that helpful

Choice is a great thing for the average consumer, but not necessarily for an enterprise. In considering Android as an option, several issues arose that led us to conclude that the iPad was the best choice.  One of the main issues — choosing an Android device involves several extra steps.

First, we would likely order a few different devices, test them out, and then, for practical reasons, probably pick one device. Picking more than one would complicate everything from picking accessories to device management by the IT folks. And if were going to choose a single device in the end, then the value of choice for individual housestaff is ultimately lost anyways.

Another argument could be made that Android potentially offers cost-savings in comparison to the iPad. However, we determined early on that we didn’t need the 3G connectivity nor did we need the 32gb memory. Our application of the device is primarily for in-hospital use where WiFi connectivity is available – this makes the 16gb WiFi iPad the natural choice and very competitive in terms of pricing, roughly $500.00.

What about apps?

Apps are a big part of success of any mobile platform. We’ve talked before about how their absence in the Blackberry and Windows environments are an Achille’s heel for those platforms. However, the difference between iPad and Android apps did not end up being a significant factor in the selection of the iPad as our platform of choice.

Perhaps it was the sense of parity between iPad and Android, given that most major apps are available on both. Additionally, the issue of app compatibility across different Android devices was less of a concern since we would most likely only be dealing with one Android device anyways.

These reasons, among others, were major drivers in our selection of the iPad as the platform of choice in our efforts to go mobile. Please share your thoughts and experiences below as we’d love to hear and learn from other efforts.

Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

Posted on by

Post image for Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency launches iPad program

[Ed. Note: This post will be part of an ongoing series on the efforts of the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine program to go mobile. Given that Dr. Misra (iMedicalApps senior editor) is part of this effort, we will be able to share an honest, insider perspective that can help others learn from the Hopkins experience. Not only was this permitted by the Hopkins program leadership, it was embraced, and for that we are grateful. ]

Medical training is currently undergoing a dramatic change. Duty hour reforms, increasing financial and regulatory demands, and a healthcare system at the center of a political battle are among the extraordinary pressures being exerted on the traditional training model.

These pressures require that training programs at all levels – from medical school to the most sub-specialized fellowships – rethink how we do pretty much everything.

Recently, the Johns Hopkins Internal Medicine residency program distributed iPads to its housestaff as part of an effort to do just that. The aims of the program are quite broad – to increase the efficiency of in-hospital care, enhance clinical training of residents, improve patient-physician communication, and more.

The mobile platform is relatively young in terms of its utilization in healthcare and many of the potential applications, benefits, and pitfalls remain to be discovered. As this program continues to grow and evolve, iMedicalApps will continue to share the the insider perspective on the Hopkins experience as part of our shared desire to drive this process forward. In this first installment, we’ll start by addressing the question – why the iPad?

Why the iPad

There are many tablet’s out there that are similar, and in some ways, better than the iPad. In fact, Apple is in a legal dispute with Samsung because they claim the Galaxy tab is a repackaged iPad. And the question certainly came up – why not go with another tablet? Android is arguably a more malleable platform than iOS, many of the tablets are cheaper, and there are many more options.  We’ve had great debates on iMedicalApps in the past about this subject.

Here are a few reasons why we went with the iPad.

The iPad has a head start

When looking to launch a mobile platform, you have to consider your audience. And in any clinical practice, that will include a range of familiarity with consumer technologies, specifically in this case tablets. Among those that were already using tablets, all of them were using iPads. That simple detail confers a number of advantages.

First, with the iPad, we have a group of individuals who are already “embedded” within the our audience. So not only had their use of the device already piqued the interest of others, they also were engaged in this program from the beginning. After launch, these individuals can provide both formal and informal help to colleagues who are less familiar with the device and platform.

Second, in terms of program planning and development, we already had a wealth of experience due to using the iPad in our own institution. These early adopters had already problem-solved a number of issues, found some of the potential efficiencies to be gained, and even identified potential new applications and enhancements.

Third, the launch of the iPad program at the University of Chicago was certainly helpful as their program leadership was quite forthcoming with their own experiences.

The choice Android offers wasn’t all that helpful

Choice is a great thing for the average consumer, but not necessarily for an enterprise. In considering Android as an option, several issues arose that led us to conclude that the iPad was the best choice.  One of the main issues — choosing an Android device involves several extra steps.

First, we would likely order a few different devices, test them out, and then, for practical reasons, probably pick one device. Picking more than one would complicate everything from picking accessories to device management by the IT folks. And if were going to choose a single device in the end, then the value of choice for individual housestaff is ultimately lost anyways.

Another argument could be made that Android potentially offers cost-savings in comparison to the iPad. However, we determined early on that we didn’t need the 3G connectivity nor did we need the 32gb memory. Our application of the device is primarily for in-hospital use where WiFi connectivity is available – this makes the 16gb WiFi iPad the natural choice and very competitive in terms of pricing, roughly $500.00.

What about apps?

Apps are a big part of success of any mobile platform. We’ve talked before about how their absence in the Blackberry and Windows environments are an Achille’s heel for those platforms. However, the difference between iPad and Android apps did not end up being a significant factor in the selection of the iPad as our platform of choice.

Perhaps it was the sense of parity between iPad and Android, given that most major apps are available on both. Additionally, the issue of app compatibility across different Android devices was less of a concern since we would most likely only be dealing with one Android device anyways.

These reasons, among others, were major drivers in our selection of the iPad as the platform of choice in our efforts to go mobile. Please share your thoughts and experiences below as we’d love to hear and learn from other efforts.

Monster Anatomy Upper Limb iPad app is a decent radiographic introduction to the upper limb

Posted on by

Post image for Monster Anatomy Upper Limb iPad app is a decent radiographic introduction to the upper limb

Monster Anatomy was prominently featured in older Apple commercials for the original iPad with their Lower Limb Anatomy app.

iMedicalApps did a full text and video review of the app last year.

This impressive app was well received by us, although one of its major limitations was the fact that it only covered the lower limb.

This has now changed with Monster Anatomy releasing a similar app covering the Upper Limb.

Upper Limb covers an area ranging from the shoulder down to the hand and presents detailed anatomical information in the same fashion as its predecessor.  Monster Anatomy has provided detailed interactive transverse, coronal and sagital radiographs of the Upper limb.

The fantastic user interface is easy to use and it is simple to scroll through the upper limb using either touch gestures or the sequential arrows. The actual radiographs can be zoomed and manipulated using pinch-to-zoom which is handy for examining fine detail.

02_alt

It is possible to select either Bones, Joints, Muscles, Vessels, or Nerves along a bottom tab which will then be illustrated on the actual radiograph. What is particularly impressive is that selecting a different tab will change the representation in the two 3D representations (see screenshots for details).

03_alt
04_alt
05_alt
06_alt
07_alt

The ability to follow a particular structure throughout the app is useful and is accomplished by selecting a label and using the arrows to navigate through the upper limb. The selected label will flash and this can be tracked throughout the images.

The level of detail is high and individual features can be clearly picked out of the high resolution images. It should be noted that this does not cover the sternoclavicular joint which is associated with stabilizing the upper limb.

08_alt
09_alt
10_alt
11_alt

This app also has a number of uses for educating patients and could easily be used at the bedside to illustrate pathologies such as carpal tunnel syndrome (refer to screenshot).

12_alt

One of our dislikes was the fact that only one side is presented and unfortunately this has still not changed. As a result it is difficult to appreciate the symmetry and the anatomical differences between left and right.

However, the stability issues previously discussed do seem to have been solved (although this review was done on an iPad 2).

Price:

  • $18.99 – This seems quite expensive given the fact that only the upper limb is shown. This may price a number of medical students out of the market and a number of healthcare professionals may think twice about purchasing this app.

Likes:

  • Ability to scroll throughout the whole upper limb smoothly whilst tracking anatomical structures
  • Anatomical features are clearly labeled allowing you to test your knowledge
  • Detailed radiographic images

Dislikes:

  • Shows only one side of the body
  • Only covers the upper limb – for this price, would be nice to include more than just the upper limb

Overall Rating:

  • Monster Anatomy HD – Upper Limb would be particularly useful to students who are looking to transfer their gross anatomical knowledge to actual radiographs
  • The clear labels and ability to select and track different anatomical features is useful and complemented by the high resolution images
  • Despite the high price and lack of both upper limbs, this app will be useful for those who are trying to understand radiographic gross anatomy or interested in informing patients.

iTunes link: