Evaluating Chinese Mobile Health Apps for Ankylosing Spondylitis Management: Systematic App Search

Background: Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), a chronic systematic inflammatory disease, require long-term treatment and management. Mobile health (mHealth) apps can deliver health services through mobile devices, facilitate long-term disease management, support patient–health care provider communication, and enable patients to engage in disease management. There are some apps targeted at patients with AS, but the feature and quality of these apps have not been systematically examined. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify existing, publicly available Chinese mHealth apps for AS management and to evaluate their features and quality. Methods: We systematically searched potential apps for AS management on the Apple and Huawei App Stores, using 4 search terms: ankylosing spondylitis, spondyloarthritis, rheumatic disease, and arthritis. Apps were included if they were in the Chinese language, targeted at patients with AS, could be downloaded and run on Android and/or iOS operating systems, and incorporated elements of disease management and/or patient education. We excluded apps that were not for patient use, not relevant to AS, or had not been updated since 2018. Apps that met the inclusion criteria were downloaded for final analysis. We formulated a list of app quality measures from and consistent with international guidelines for mHealth apps and AS management to evaluate the features and quality of the included app. The user version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (uMARS) was also used to rate the apps’ quality. Results: Of the 354 apps screened, 5 met the inclusion criteria and were included in our analysis. All apps were free, and most apps (4/5, 80%) had a privacy policy. Of the 5 apps, 1 (20%) involved medical professionals in the development process, 2 (40%) were developed by companies, and 2 (40%) were developed by medical institutions. All apps provided educational information about AS. Around half of the apps had functions like a basic information record (ie, users can input gender, age, disease history, etc) (n=3, 60%), patient–health care provider (and patient-patient) communication (n=2, 40%), symptom tracking (n=2, 40%), and information sharing (n=3, 60%). Only 1 (20%) app provided comprehensive functions that adhered to international guidelines for AS management and mHealth apps. The overall uMARS scores ranged from 2.7 to 4.2; only 1 app, with an overall uMARS score of 4.2, was considered as a high-quality app. Conclusions: