BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation has become increasingly common as a last-resort treatment for end-stage liver diseases and liver cancer, with continually improving success rates and long-term survival rates. Nevertheless, liver transplant recipients face lifelong challenges in self-management, including immunosuppressant therapy, lifestyle adjustments, and navigating complex health care systems. eHealth technologies hold the potential to aid and optimize self-management outcomes, but their adoption has been slow in this population due to the complexity of post-liver transplant management.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the use of eHealth technologies in supporting self-management for liver transplant recipients and identify their benefits and challenges to suggest areas for further research.
METHODS: Following the Arksey and O\'Malley methodology for scoping reviews, we conducted a systematic search of 5 electronic databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. We included studies that (1) examined or implemented eHealth-based self-management, (2) included liver transplant recipients aged ≥18 years, and (3) were published in a peer-reviewed journal. We excluded studies that (1) were case reports, conference abstracts, editorials, or letters; (2) did not focus on the posttransplantation phase; (3) did not focus on self-management; and (4) did not incorporate the concept of eHealth or used technology solely for data collection. The quality of the selected eHealth interventions was evaluated using (1) the Template for Intervention Description and Replication guidelines and checklist and (2) the 5 core self-management skills identified by Lorig and Holman.
RESULTS: Of 1461 articles, 15 (1.03%) studies were included in the final analysis. Our findings indicate that eHealth-based self-management strategies for adult liver transplant recipients primarily address lifestyle management, medication adherence, and remote monitoring, highlighting a notable gap in alcohol relapse interventions. The studies used diverse technologies, including mobile apps, videoconferencing, and telehealth platforms, but showed limited integration of decision-making or resource use skills essential for comprehensive self-management. The reviewed studies highlighted the potential of eHealth in enhancing individualized health care, but only a few included collaborative features such as 2-way communication or tailored goal setting. While adherence and feasibility were generally high in many interventions, their effectiveness varied due to diverse methodologies and outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review maps the current literature on eHealth-based self-management support for liver transplant recipients, assessing its potential and challenges. Future studies should focus on developing predictive models and personalized eHealth interventions rooted in patient-generated data, incorporating digital human-to-human interactions to effectively address the complex needs of liver transplant recipients. This review emphasizes the need for future eHealth self-management research to address the digital divide, especially with the aging liver transplant recipient population, and ensure more inclusive studies across diverse ethnicities and regions.

The NeuMoDx96 platform is a fully automated real-time PCR (RT-PCR) system. To provide continued testing quality with the introduction of new assays, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of the NeuMoDx platform for the detection and quantification of CMV and EBV DNA in EDTA plasma. As no conversion from log10 international units per milliliter to copies per milliliter was provided, the secondary aim was to calculate and establish a conversion factor for the output of results in copies per milliliter for CMV and EBV. Archived ETDA plasma samples (cytomegalovirus [CMV], n = 290; Ebstein-Barr virus [EBV], n = 254) were used to evaluate the analytical performance of the NeuMoDx96 platform against the routine real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays. Additionally, the first WHO international standards (WHO-IS) for CMV (n = 70) and EBV (n = 72) were used for the calculation of the intra- and interassay variation. WHO-IS qualitative agreement between the assays was 100%. Intra-assay variability was low for both CMV assays (coefficient of variation [CV], phosphate-buffered saline [PBS], 3 log10 IU/mL NeuMoDx, 3.67%; Abbott RealTime, CMV, 3.35%) and NeuMoDx EBV assay (CV, PBS, 3 log10 IU/mL, 3.05%) but high for the Altona EBV assay (CV, PBS, 3 log10 IU/mL, 26.13%). The overall qualitative concordance in clinical samples was 96.8% (270/279) for CMV and 96.7% (237/245) for EBV. The mean difference between the assays was -0.2 log10 IU/mL (CMV) and -0.18 log10 IU/mL (EBV). High qualitative concordance and a significant correlation of quantitative values for both assays make NeuMoDx CMV and EBV assays suitable for routine diagnostic testing. The new RT-PCR system and conversion formulas to report results in copies per milliliter are now applied in clinical routine testing. IMPORTANCE Clinical management of solid organ transplant (SOT) patients requires the careful monitoring of immunosuppression and viral infection or reactivation. qPCR is the gold standard for the detection and quantification of very small amounts of viral DNA and allows for an early assessment of viral load kinetics. The tested NeuMoDx 96 platform provides faster results than the previously used RT-PCR workflows for CMV (Abbott m2000 and RealTime CMV assay) and EBV (LightCycler 480 II, Roche high pure extraction, and Altona RealStar EBV assay) DNA detection. The implemented conversion formulas allow the continued reporting in clinically established copies per milliliter, important for long-term care of SOT patients.