Facilitators and barriers of using digital technology for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A qualitative systematic review

Veteran and healthcare team perspectives on the TeleWound Practice Program within the Veterans Health Administration

OBJECTIVE

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) recently piloted the implementation of the TeleWound Practice Program (TWP), which provides interprofessional wound care to Veterans remotely. We assessed the perceptions of Veterans and healthcare team members (HCTMs), and their experiences with the TWP.

METHOD

We surveyed Veterans from four VHA medical centres who had received at least one TWP visit between 1 May 2020 and 31 May 2021, and HCTMs associated with any TWP encounter between 1 September 2019 and 31 March 2021. Survey data were summarised using descriptive statistics and open-ended question responses were analysed using thematic coding.

RESULTS

Out of 534 Veterans approached, 194 completed the survey (a 36% response rate). Most were interested in continuing to use TeleWound care (66%), felt more motivated to participate in their wound care due to the TWP (70%), and reported reductions in travel distance (81%) and cost (81%) related to wound care. Of the 32 HCTMs approached, 19 completed the TWP survey (a 59% response rate). Respondents indicated that the TWP improved their own professional decision-making skills (82%) and supported Veterans to take a more active role in their health (100%). Challenges included insufficient training for HTCMs, lack of stakeholder buy-in, and logistical and technical issues. Suggestions for improvement related to equipment, additional training and dedicated TWP staff.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the Veterans were satisfied with the TWP and were more motivated to engage in wound self-management after receiving care through the TWP. HCTMs also perceived the TWP as beneficial to Veterans. However, additional efforts are needed to address barriers to TWP implementation across the VHA system of care.

The implementation of telemedicine in wound care: a qualitative study of nurses' and patients' experiences

BACKGROUND

The increasing use of telemedicine (TM) represents a major shift for health workers and patients alike. Thus, there is a need for more knowledge on how these interventions work and are implemented. We conducted a qualitative process-evaluation alongside a larger randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate a telemedicine follow-up intervention for patients with a leg- or foot-ulcer, who either have or do not have diabetes. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to explore how both health care professionals and patients experienced the implementation of TM follow-up in primary care.

METHODS

The intervention comprised an interactive TM platform facilitating guidance and counselling regarding wound care between nurses in primary care and nurses in specialist health care in Norway. Nurses and patients from seven clusters in the intervention arm were included in the study. We conducted 26 individual interviews (14 patients and 12 nurses) in primary care between December 2021 and March 2022. Thematic analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The analyses revealed the following themes: (1) enhancing professional self-efficacy for wound care, (2) a need to redesign the approach to implementing TM technology and (3) challenging to facilitate behavioral changes in relation to preventive care. As to patients' experiences with taking part in the intervention, we found the following three themes: (1) experience with TM promotes a feeling of security over time, (2) patients' preferences and individual needs on user participation in TM are not met, and (3) experiencing limited focus on prevention of re-ulceration.

CONCLUSIONS

TM presents both opportunities and challenges. Future implementation should focus on providing nurses with improved technological equipment and work on how to facilitate the use of TM in regular practice in order to fully capitalize on this new technology. Future TM interventions need to tailor the level of information and integrate a more systematic approach for working with preventive strategies.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01710774. Registration Date 2012-10-17.

The Effect of Telemedicine Interventions on Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective: The meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions on patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Approach: The authors conducted a comprehensive search across eight databases. The aim was to identify randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of telemedicine for patients with DFU. Methodological qualities of included studies were assessed using Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 to synthesize the findings. Results: Ten studies involving 1,678 patients with DFU were included in the meta-analysis. In comparison to the face-to-face intervention group, telemedicine interventions significantly reduced the amputation rate (risk ratio = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.44-0.92, p = 0.02), decreased costs (mean difference [MD] = -4158.51, 95% CI = -7304.69 to -1012.34, p = 0.01), better controlled fasting blood glucose (MD = -0.89, 95% CI = -1.43 to -0.36, p = 0.001), and achieved superior glycated hemoglobin control (MD = -0.71, 95% CI = -1.01 to -0.41, p < 0.00001). No significant differences were observed between the telemedicine group and the face-to-face group in terms of healing rate, mortality, and healing time. Innovations: Our study suggests that telemedicine is a viable strategy for managing DFU. Conclusions: The meta-analysis indicates that telemedicine interventions have a positive effect on DFU. Nevertheless, more well-designed and high-quality studies are needed to reach a conclusion with greater confidence.

Implementation barriers and facilitators of remote monitoring, remote consultation and digital care platforms through the eyes of healthcare professionals: a review of reviews

OBJECTIVES

Digital transformation in healthcare is a necessity considering the steady increase in healthcare costs, the growing ageing population and rising number of people living with chronic diseases. The implementation of digital health technologies in patient care is a potential solution to these issues, however, some challenges remain. In order to navigate such complexities, the perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) must be considered. The objective of this umbrella review is to identify key barriers and facilitators involved in digital health technology implementation, from the perspective of HCPs.

DESIGN

Systematic umbrella review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

DATA SOURCES

Embase.com, PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for existing reviews dated up to 17 June 2022. Search terms included digital health technology, combined with terms related to implementation, and variations in terms encompassing HCP, such as physician, doctor and the medical discipline.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Quantitative and qualitative reviews evaluating digital technologies that included patient interaction were considered eligible. Three reviewers independently synthesised and assessed eligible reviews and conducted a critical appraisal.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Regarding the data collection, two reviewers independently synthesised and interpreted data on barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

Thirty-three reviews met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators were categorised into four levels: (1) the organisation, (2) the HCP, (3) the patient and (4) technical aspects. The main barriers and facilitators identified were (lack of) training (n=22/33), (un)familiarity with technology (n=17/33), (loss of) communication (n=13/33) and security and confidentiality issues (n=17/33). Barriers of key importance included increased workload (n=16/33), the technology undermining aspects of professional identity (n=11/33), HCP uncertainty about patients' aptitude with the technology (n=9/33), and technical issues (n=12/33).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation strategy should address the key barriers highlighted by HCPs, for instance, by providing adequate training to familiarise HCPs with the technology, adapting the technology to the patient preferences and addressing technical issues. Barriers on both HCP and patient levels can be overcome by investigating the needs of the end-users. As we shift from traditional face-to-face care models towards new modes of care delivery, further research is needed to better understand the role of digital technology in the HCP-patient relationship.

Telehealth-Delivered Allied Health Interventions: A Rapid Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

Introduction: Telehealth is used by allied health professionals to deliver health care remotely. This umbrella review addressed the following questions: (1) What telehealth interventions have been implemented to deliver allied health care? (2) What are the reported clinical benefits, and challenges of the implementation of telehealth delivered allied health interventions? (3) What are the reported experiences of patients and clinicians? Methods: A rapid umbrella systematic review method was utilized. Following a search of five electronic databases, only systematic reviews reporting on telehealth-delivery allied health interventions published in the past 10 years were included. Reported outcomes included clinical effectiveness, implementation factors, and patient/clinician experiences. Methodological quality was established using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. Results: After applying eligibility criteria to 571 studies, 26 studies were included. Findings indicate that telehealth-delivered allied health interventions may obtain similar clinical outcomes as compared with face-to-face appointments. Patients reported less stress and valued the reduced need to travel when telehealth was used. Patient satisfaction with telehealth delivered care was equal to face-to-face care, and no differences were noted in the capacity to build therapeutic alliance when using telehealth. Difficulties with technology use were reported by clinicians and patients. Clinicians were identified as needing increased time management skills. Cautious interpretation of findings is recommended due to the quality rating of low to critical low for the majority of individual reviews. Conclusions: Telehealth-delivered care might obtain similar clinical outcomes to face-to-face care; however, difficulties may arise during broad implementation. It is recommended that health services be strategic to overcome implementation barriers and provide targeted support to enable effective, equitable, and sustained allied health service delivery via telehealth.

Preferences of people with chronic kidney disease regarding digital health interventions that promote healthy lifestyle: qualitative systematic review with meta-ethnography

OBJECTIVES

Diet and physical activity are crucial for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to maintain good health. Digital health interventions can increase access to lifestyle services. However, consumers' perspectives are unclear, which may reduce the capacity to develop interventions that align with specific needs and preferences. Therefore, this review aims to synthesise the preferences of people with CKD regarding digital health interventions that promote healthy lifestyle.

DESIGN

Qualitative systematic review with meta-ethnography.

DATA SOURCES

Databases Scopus, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus were searched between 2000 and 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Primary research papers that used qualitative exploration methods to explore the preferences of adults with CKD (≥18 years) regarding digital health interventions that promoted diet, physical activity or a combination of these health behaviours.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers screened title, abstract and full text. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. Consumers' quotes were extracted verbatim and synthesised into higher-order themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Database search yielded 5761 records. One record was identified following communication with a primary author. 15 papers were included. These papers comprised 197 consumers (mean age 51.0±7.2), including 83 people with CKD 1-5; 61 kidney transplant recipients; 53 people on dialysis. Sex was reported in 182 people, including 53% male. Five themes were generated regarding consumers' preferences for digital lifestyle interventions. These included simple instruction and engaging design; individualised interventions; virtual communities of care; education and action plans; and timely reminders and automated behavioural monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Digital health interventions were considered an important mechanism to access lifestyle services. Consumers' preferences are important to ensure future interventions are tailored to specific needs and goals. Future research may consider applying the conceptual framework of consumers' preferences in this review to develop and evaluate the effect of a digital lifestyle intervention on health outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023411511.

The role of champions in the implementation of technology in healthcare services: a systematic mixed studies review

BACKGROUND

Champions play a critical role in implementing technology within healthcare services. While prior studies have explored the presence and characteristics of champions, this review delves into the experiences of healthcare personnel holding champion roles, as well as the experiences of healthcare personnel interacting with them. By synthesizing existing knowledge, this review aims to inform decisions regarding the inclusion of champions as a strategy in technology implementation and guide healthcare personnel in these roles.

METHODS

A systematic mixed studies review, covering qualitative, quantitative, or mixed designs, was conducted from September 2022 to March 2023. The search spanned Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus, focusing on studies published from 2012 onwards. The review centered on health personnel serving as champions in technology implementation within healthcare services. Quality assessments utilized the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

RESULTS

From 1629 screened studies, 23 were included. The champion role was often examined within the broader context of technology implementation. Limited studies explicitly explored experiences related to the champion role from both champions' and health personnel's perspectives. Champions emerged as promoters of technology, supporting its adoption. Success factors included anchoring and selection processes, champions' expertise, and effective role performance.

DISCUSSION

The specific tasks and responsibilities assigned to champions differed across reviewed studies, highlighting that the role of champion is a broad one, dependent on the technology being implemented and the site implementing it. Findings indicated a correlation between champion experiences and organizational characteristics. The role's firm anchoring within the organization is crucial. Limited evidence suggests that volunteering, hiring newly graduated health personnel, and having multiple champions can facilitate technology implementation. Existing studies predominantly focused on client health records and hospitals, emphasizing the need for broader research across healthcare services.

CONCLUSIONS

With a clear mandate, dedicated time, and proper training, health personnel in champion roles can significantly contribute professional, technological, and personal competencies to facilitate technology adoption within healthcare services. The review finds that the concept of champions is a broad one and finds varied definitions of the champion role concept. This underscores the importance of describing organizational characteristics, and highlights areas for future research to enhance technology implementation strategies in different healthcare settings with support of a champion.

The impact of eHealth on relationships and trust in primary care: a review of reviews

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing integration of digital health technologies in team-based primary care, this review aimed at understanding the impact of eHealth on patient-provider and provider-provider relationships.

METHODS

A review of reviews was conducted on three databases to identify papers published in English from 2008 onwards. The impact of different types of eHealth on relationships and trust and the factors influencing the impact were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 79 reviews were included. Patient-provider relationships were discussed more frequently as compared to provider-provider relationships. Communication systems like telemedicine were the most discussed type of technology. eHealth was found to have both positive and negative impacts on relationships and/or trust. This impact was influenced by a range of patient-related, provider-related, technology-related, and organizational factors, such as patient sociodemographics, provider communication skills, technology design, and organizational technology implementation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations are provided for effective and equitable technology selection, application, and training to optimize the impact of eHealth on relationships and trust. The review findings can inform providers' and policymakers' decision-making around the use of eHealth in primary care delivery to facilitate relationship-building.

Remote monitoring for long-term physical health conditions: an evidence and gap map

Background

Remote monitoring involves the measurement of an aspect of a patient's health without that person being seen face to face. It could benefit the individual and aid the efficient provision of health services. However, remote monitoring can be used to monitor different aspects of health in different ways. This evidence map allows users to find evidence on different forms of remote monitoring for different conditions easily to support the commissioning and implementation of interventions.

Objectives

The aim of this map was to provide an overview of the volume, diversity and nature of recent systematic reviews on the effectiveness, acceptability and implementation of remote monitoring for adults with long-term physical health conditions.

Data sources

We searched MEDLINE, nine further databases and Epistemonikos for systematic reviews published between 2018 and March 2022, PROSPERO for continuing reviews, and completed citation chasing on included studies.

Review methods

(Study selection and Study appraisal): Included systematic reviews focused on adult populations with a long-term physical health condition and reported on the effectiveness, acceptability or implementation of remote monitoring. All forms of remote monitoring where data were passed to a healthcare professional as part of the intervention were included. Data were extracted on the characteristics of the remote monitoring intervention and outcomes assessed in the review. AMSTAR 2 was used to assess quality. Results were presented in an interactive evidence and gap map and summarised narratively. Stakeholder and public and patient involvement groups provided feedback throughout the project.

Results

We included 72 systematic reviews. Of these, 61 focus on the effectiveness of remote monitoring and 24 on its acceptability and/or implementation, with some reviews reporting on both. The majority contained studies from North America and Europe (38 included studies from the United Kingdom). Patients with cardiovascular disease, diabetes and respiratory conditions were the most studied populations. Data were collected predominantly using common devices such as blood pressure monitors and transmitted via applications, websites, e-mail or patient portals, feedback provided via telephone call and by nurses. In terms of outcomes, most reviews focused on physical health, mental health and well-being, health service use, acceptability or implementation. Few reviews reported on less common conditions or on the views of carers or healthcare professionals. Most reviews were of low or critically low quality.

Limitations

Many terms are used to describe remote monitoring; we searched as widely as possible but may have missed some relevant reviews. Poor reporting of remote monitoring interventions may mean some included reviews contain interventions that do not meet our definition, while relevant reviews might have been excluded. This also made the interpretation of results difficult.

Conclusions and future work

The map provides an interactive, visual representation of evidence on the effectiveness of remote monitoring and its acceptability and successful implementation. This evidence could support the commissioning and delivery of remote monitoring interventions, while the limitations and gaps could inform further research and technological development. Future reviews should follow the guidelines for conducting and reporting systematic reviews and investigate the application of remote monitoring in less common conditions.

Review registration

A protocol was registered on the OSF registry (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/6Q7P4).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR135450) as part of a series of evidence syntheses under award NIHR130538. For more information, visit https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR135450 and https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR130538. The report is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 22. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further project information.

Fast-Access Multidisciplinary Approach to Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: The Diabetic Rapid Evaluation and Lower Limb Amputation Management (DREAM) Clinic

Background

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are debilitating to the patient and costly for the healthcare system. We set up the Diabetic Rapid Evaluation and lower limb Amputation Management (DREAM) clinic with the aim of providing early directed specialist care to patients with DFUs. With early management, we hope to treat DFUs in its early stages, reducing the need for and associated morbidity of major and minor lower limb amputations.

Objectives

We evaluated the outcomes of the fast-access DREAM clinic with multi-disciplinary evaluation for patients with DFUs. Outcomes include time from the point of referral to DREAM clinic evaluation, amputation rates and wound healing rates.

Design

Patients presenting with DFU to the DREAM clinic were enrolled. A podiatrist made the first assessment, followed by immediate specialist consultation with Endocrinologists, Vascular surgeons or Orthopaedic surgeons as required.

Methods

Data on baseline demographics and DFU characteristics were collected. Outcomes evaluated were wound healing at 12 weeks, wound salvage rates, time to DREAM clinic access and time to specialist referral.

Results

Sixty-eight patients were enrolled, with 57.3% males, and mean age of 63 ± 13.0 years. Majority of ulcers were classified as neuropathic (41.3%) and located at the digits (40%). At 12-weeks follow-up, 1 had undergone major amputation, 9 minor amputations and 4 surgical debridements. The median time to DREAM clinic evaluation from first presentation was 3 days (IQR 7). Eleven (16.2%) required >1 specialist consult. Twenty (29.4%) were hospitalised for treatment. Twelve underwent revascularisation within 4 days (IQR 3.5). Twenty-four patients (35.3%) continued podiatry follow-up, having 28 DFUs in which 20 (71.4%) healed within 12 weeks.

Conclusion

The fast-access multidisciplinary DREAM clinic shows promising outcomes with lower major amputation rates and exemplary DFU healing outcomes.

Role of Caregivers in Remote Management of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

With the growing use of remote monitoring technologies in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), caregivers are becoming important resources that can be tapped into to improve patient care.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to summarize the role of caregivers in the remote monitoring of patients with T2DM.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science up to 2022. Studies that evaluated the role of caregivers in remote management of adult patients with T2DM were included. Outcomes such as diabetes control, adherence to medication, quality of life, frequency of home glucose monitoring, and health care use were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 1198 identified citations, 11 articles were included. The majority of studies were conducted in North America (7/11, 64%) and South America (2/11, 18%). The main types of caregivers studied were family or friends (10/11, 91%), while the most common remote monitoring modalities evaluated were interactive voice response (5/11, 45%) and phone consultations (4/11, 36%). With regard to diabetes control, 3 of 6 studies showed improvement in diabetes-related laboratory parameters. A total of 2 studies showed improvements in patients' medication adherence rates and frequency of home glucose monitoring. Studies that evaluated patients' quality of life showed mixed evidence. In 1 study, increased hospitalization rates were noted in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers may play a role in improving clinical outcomes among patients with T2DM under remote monitoring. Studies on mobile health technologies are lacking to understand their impact on Asian populations and long-term patient outcomes.

How patients with diabetic foot ulcers experience telemedicine solutions: A scoping review

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common, complex and severe complication of diabetes that is associated with severely decreased health-related quality of life. Treatment of DFUs calls for a multi-sectoral approach, incorporating interdisciplinary care pathways. Telemedicine (TM) may be used as a communication tool between caregivers across healthcare sectors to obligate the need for close follow-up, including early intervention in preventing the recurrence of DFU. The objective of this review was to identify, examine and conceptually map the available literature on patients' experiences and views regarding the use of TM solutions among patients with DFUs. We identified the Population, Concept and Context to pinpoint the focus of this review, word the research question and title as well as facilitate the literature search strategy. The literature examined stems from 13 sources. We imposed no restrictions on the methodological approach of the included studies, neither on the format. During the review process, four main maps emerged: "A whole human not merely a hole in a human," "Less of a burden on the family, the community and the environment," "Competences and continuity of care are essential for high-quality care" and "The quality and modality of the technology." Further investigation from both the patients' and the multi-sectoral caregivers' perspective is needed, focusing on whatever modifications of the TM intervention may fit the DFU care pathway better.

Self-Monitoring Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcers with the MyFootCare App: A Mixed Methods Study

People with diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs) need to perform self-care consistently over many months to promote healing and to mitigate risks of hospitalisation and amputation. However, during that time, improvement in their DFU can be hard to detect. Hence, there is a need for an accessible method to self-monitor DFUs at home. We developed a new mobile phone app, "MyFootCare", to self-monitor DFU healing progression from photos of the foot. The aim of this study is to evaluate the engagement and perceived value of MyFootCare for people with a plantar DFU over 3 months' duration. Data are collected through app log data and semi-structured interviews (weeks 0, 3, and 12) and analysed through descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Ten out of 12 participants perceive MyFootCare as valuable to monitor progress and to reflect on events that affected self-care, and seven participants see it as potentially valuable to enhance consultations. Three app engagement patterns emerge: continuous, temporary, and failed engagement. These patterns highlight enablers for self-monitoring (such as having MyFootCare installed on the participant's phone) and barriers (such as usability issues and lack of healing progress). We conclude that while many people with DFUs perceive app-based self-monitoring as valuable, actual engagement can be achieved for some but not for all people because of various facilitators and barriers. Further research should target improving usability, accuracy and sharing with healthcare professionals and test clinical outcomes when using the app.

Patients, carers and healthcare providers' perspectives on a patient-owned surveillance system for diabetic foot ulcer care: A qualitative study

Objective

Digital health has recently gained a foothold in monitoring and improving diabetes care. We aim to explore the views of patients, carers and healthcare providers (HCPs) regarding the use of a novel patient-owned wound surveillance application as part of outpatient management of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs).

Methods

Semi-structured online interviews were conducted with patients, carers and HCPs in wound care for DFUs. The participants were recruited from a primary care polyclinic network and two tertiary hospitals in Singapore, within the same healthcare cluster. Purposive maximum variation sampling was used to select participants with differing attributes to ensure heterogeneity. Common themes relating to the wound imaging app were captured.

Results

A total of 20 patients, 5 carers and 20 HCPs participated in the qualitative study. None of the participants have used a wound imaging app before. Regarding a patient-owned wound surveillance app, all were open and receptive to the system and workflow for use in DFU care. Four major themes emerged from patients and carers: (1) technology, (2) application features and usability, (3) feasibility of using the wound imaging application and (4) logistics of care. Four major themes were identified from HCPs: (1) attitudes towards wound imaging app, (2) preferences regarding functionality, (3) perceived challenges for patients/carers and (4) perceived barriers for HCPs.

Conclusion

Our study highlighted several barriers and facilitators from patients, carers and HCPs regarding the use of a patient-owned wound surveillance app. These findings demonstrate the potential of digital health and areas to improve and tailor a DFU wound app suitable for implementation in the local population.

Disparities in Perioperative Use of Patient Engagement Technologies - Not All Use is Equal

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association of patient-level characteristics on the use of a patient engagement technology during the perioperative period.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As implementation of patient engagement technologies continues to grow, it remains unclear who uses, and not uses, these technologies. Existing literature suggests significant disparities in usage of other technologies by patient age, race, sex, and geographic location, however, have yet to characterize patient usage of patient engagement technologies.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective surgery by a colorectal surgeon between January 2018 and March 2020 who enrolled in a patient engagement technology at a single institution. Patients enrolled received educational content, healthcare reminders, patient reported outcome (PRO) surveys, and health checks preoperatively, in-hospital, and for 30-days postdischarge. The primary outcome was patient activation of the patient engagement technology. Secondary outcomes were completion of at least 1 PRO survey, 1 in-hospital health check, and 1 postdischarge health check.

RESULTS

Of 549 patients who enrolled in the patient engagement technology, 473 (86.2%) activated. On multivariable stepwise regression, female patients [odds ratio (OR) 2.4, confidence interval (CI) 1.4-4.0, P = 0.001] and privately insured patients (OR 2.0, CI 1.1-3.8, P = 0.03) were more likely to activate. Black patients were less likely to activate (OR 0.5, CI 0.3-0.9, P = 0.02). Once activated, privately insured patients were more likely to complete PRO surveys (OR 2.3, CI 1.2-4.3, P = 0.01), in-hospital health checks (OR 2.4, CI 1.4-4.1, P = 0.002), and postdischarge health checks (OR 1.9, CI 1.1 -3.3, P < 0.001) than uninsured patients. Black patients were less likely to complete PRO surveys (OR 0.4, CI 0.3-0.7, P = 0.001) and in-hospital health checks (OR 0.6, CI 0.4-0.9, P = 0.03) than White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a patient engagement technology in the perioperative period differs significantly by sex, race/ethnicity, and insurance status. These technologies may not be used equally by all patients, which should be considered during implementation of interventions to improve surgical outcomes.

Remotely Delivered Monitoring and Management of Diabetes-Related Foot Disease: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) management requires input from multiple healthcare professionals, and has worse outcomes for people living in remote localities by comparison to urban areas. Remotely delivered healthcare may reduce this disparity. This overview summarizes current evidence on the effectiveness, stakeholder perceptions, and cost-effectiveness of remotely delivered healthcare for DFD.

METHODS

A search of 5 databases was conducted to identify systematic reviews published between January 2000 and June 2020. Eligible reviews were those evaluating remotely delivered monitoring or management of patients at risk of or with active DFD, or clinicians managing these patients. Risk of bias was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool.

RESULTS

Eight reviews were eligible for inclusion, including 88 primary studies and 8509 participants, of which 36 studies involving 4357 participants evaluated remotely delivered monitoring or management of DFD. Only one review had a low risk of bias, with most reviews demonstrating limited search strategies and poor reporting of participants. Evidence on effectiveness was mixed, with meta-analyses demonstrating long-term ulcer healing and mortality were not significantly different between telehealth and standard care groups, although the lower-limb amputation rate was significantly decreased in one meta-analysis. Perceptions of telehealth by patients and clinicians were generally positive, whilst acknowledging limitations relating to access and use. Cost-effectiveness data were limited, with poor reporting preventing clear conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Remotely delivered healthcare of DFD is well received by patients and clinicians, but its effectiveness is unclear. High quality trials are needed to evaluate the risks and benefits of remotely delivered DFD management.

Digital health experiences reported in chronic disease management: An umbrella review of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION

Digital health interventions can be useful for the management of chronic disease. The aim of this study was to draw out universal themes to understand how people with chronic conditions experience digital health services, programmes, and interventions, and consequently, better inform future digital health delivery.

METHODS

An umbrella review was conducted to identify qualitative systematic reviews reporting digital health experiences in chronic disease. Themes for each included review were independently extracted and appraised by two review authors. Data analysis was conducted using the Constant Comparative method.

RESULTS

Twenty-two systematic reviews containing 240 individual studies were selected for inclusion. Mental health was the most common condition (n = 5, 23%), followed by cancer (n = 4, 18%) or a combination of chronic diseases (n = 4, 18%). Common themes across the conditions were categorised under nine headings, including: (i) participation and engagement (strong usability and engagement vs reluctance to use digital health when these concepts are ignored), (ii) trust, confidence, and competence (users felt reassured, however technology illiteracy led to a perceived lack of control), (iii) perceived value, perceived effectiveness, transaction cost (gained from efficient aspects of digital health, but also lost through the burden of keeping up with data entry), (iv) perceived care quality (requiring tailoring and fostering motivation), (v) barriers and threats (related to technology risks and challenges), (vi) health outcomes (improved self-management capability), (vii) relationships (improved participant-health professional interaction, but interpersonal aspects such as face-to-face contact were lacking), (viii) unplanned benefit (where digital health often led to users feeling more empowered in their health journey), and (ix) diversity of experiences (reflecting ambivalence of experiences and discipline-specific experiences).

CONCLUSION

People with chronic conditions perceive digital health provides feelings of reassurance and the ability to self-manage their condition. While there is ambivalence across the participant experiences reported within the major themes, this umbrella review has outlined a need for future interventions that are user-friendly, flexible, and tailored to individual users. This will be best achieved through a co-design model, with the consumer actively involved in the planning and design of digital health products and services.

The engagement of nursing and healthcare researchers with digital technologies: lessons learnt in an Australian university

Background

The use of digital technologies has expanded rapidly in recent years, particularly with the onset of COVID-19. Digital technologies have been implemented in nursing and healthcare to support necessary care.

Aims

This research explored how nursing and healthcare researchers engage with digital technologies, including the types of technologies, facilitators, barriers and suggested improvements to enable engagement.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 36 nursing and healthcare researchers from an Australian University. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded and thematically analysed using the COREQ checklist.

Results

Four major types of digital technologies were engaged by nursing and healthcare researchers. These included monitoring, intervention, communication and data collection and analysis technologies. The research setting provided the overarching systems and policies that could delay actions or provide necessary supports. Access to experts, good communication, sharing digital technology information, and time and funding were identified as important.

Conclusion

This research highlights that nursing and healthcare researchers are engaging with digital technologies but there are areas for improvement that are underpinned by the research setting and need to be considered to ensure effective use of digital technologies in nursing and healthcare research.

Health Professionals' Opinions About Secondary Prevention of Diabetes-Related Foot Disease

This study explored health professionals' perceptions of current issues and opportunities for the secondary prevention of diabetes-related foot disease (DFD), and potential strategies for improving DFD care. From May to October 2020, relevant Australian health professionals completed an online survey which used ordinal scales, ranking questions, and open text fields to assess perceptions about the importance of aspects of secondary prevention for DFD and elements for a prevention program. Quantitative data were summarised and compared between professions using non-parametric tests, and qualitative data was analysed using conceptual content analysis to identify emerging themes. Perceptions from 116 health professionals with experience in managing patients with DFD were obtained, including 69 podiatrists, 21 vascular surgeons, 16 general practitioners, and ten nurses. Access and adherence to appropriate offloading footwear was perceived as a key element for effective DFD care, and believed to be affected by social and economic factors, such as the cost of footwear, as well as patient-related factors, such as motivation to wear footwear and adhere to other medical therapies. In addition to a lack of patient motivation and financial limitations, health professionals also believed patients lacked an understanding of the likelihood and severity of DFD recurrence. Several elements of care were perceived as missing from practice, including psychological support and ways to improve footwear adherence, with health professionals identifying several strategies for the design and implementation of an effective secondary prevention program. Prospective trials evaluating secondary prevention programs are required to determine the most effective means for preventing DFD recurrence.

Public patient views of artificial intelligence in healthcare: A nominal group technique study

Objectives

The beliefs of laypeople and medical professionals often diverge with regards to disease, and technology has had a positive impact on how research is conducted. Surprisingly, given the expanding worldwide funding and research into Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare, there is a paucity of research exploring the public patient perspective on this technology. Our study sets out to address this knowledge gap, by applying the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) to explore patient public views on AI.

Methods

A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used involving four study groups with seven participants in each group. This started with a silent generation of ideas regarding the benefits and concerns of AI in Healthcare. Then a group discussion and round-robin process were conducted until no new ideas were generated. Participants ranked their top five benefits and top five concerns regarding the use of AI in healthcare. A final group consensus was reached.

Results

Twenty-Eight participants were recruited with the mean age of 47 years. The top five benefits were: Faster health services, Greater accuracy in management, AI systems available 24/7, reducing workforce burden, and equality in healthcare decision making. The top five concerns were: Data cybersecurity, bias and quality of AI data, less human interaction, algorithm errors and responsibility, and limitation in technology.

Conclusion

This is the first formal qualitative study exploring patient public views on the use of AI in healthcare, and highlights that there is a clear understanding of the potential benefits delivered by this technology. Greater patient public group involvement, and a strong regulatory framework is recommended.

Patient and Provider Perspective of Smart Wearable Technology in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Prevention: A Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: Smart wearable devices are effective in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) prevention. However, factors determining their acceptance are poorly understood. This systematic review aims to examine the literature on patient and provider perspectives of smart wearable devices in DFU prevention. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched up to October 2021. The selected articles were assessed for methodological quality using the quality assessment tool for studies with diverse designs. Results: A total of five articles were identified and described. The methodological quality of the studies ranged from low to moderate. Two studies employed a quantitative study design and focused on the patient perspective, whereas three studies included a mixed, quantitative/qualitative design and explored patient or provider (podiatrist) perspectives. Four studies focused on an insole system and one included a smart sock device. The quantitative studies demonstrated that devices were comfortable, well designed and useful in preventing DFU. One mixed design study reported that patients did not intend to adopt an insole device in its current design because of malfunctions, a lack of comfort. and alert intrusiveness, despite the general perception that the device was a useful tool for foot risk monitoring. Two mixed design studies found that performance expectancy was a predictor of a podiatrist's behavioural intention to recommend an insole device in clinical practice. Disappointing participant experiences negatively impacted the podiatrists' intention to adopt a smart device. The need for additional refinements of the device was indicated by patients and providers before its use in this population. Conclusions: The current evidence about patient and provider perspectives on smart wearable technology is limited by scarce methodological quality and conflicting results. It is, thus, not possible to draw definitive conclusions regarding acceptability of these devices for the prevention of DFU in people with diabetes.

Facilitators and barriers of using digital technology for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A qualitative systematic review

The use of digital technology has been shown to be effective in managing chronic conditions. Telemedicine and mobile application are two common applications of digital technology in managing diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). The facilitators and barriers of using it for DFU management are yet to be explored. This is a qualitative systematic review. Five bibliography databases and grey literature sources were searched (2000‐2019). Two reviewers independently screened the citations, extracted the data, assessed the quality of the included studies, and performed thematic synthesis. Three studies on patients and five studies on healthcare practitioners (HCPs) were included. Two studies focused on the use of mobile applications and six on telemedicine. In studies on patients, four analytical themes were generated: the relationships with HCPs; the attitude towards the usage of digital technology; the role of wound image taking; and impact of digital technology on DFU care, encompassing 15 facilitators (eg, enabling community support, improving wound care knowledge) and 12 barriers (eg, lack of technological savviness, difficulty reading on smartphones). Three analytical themes were generated from studies on HCPs: the impact of digital technology on HCPs; the role of digital technology in DFU care; and organisation of DFU care delivery, encompassing 17 facilitators (eg, adequate wound care training, digital technology enables holistic care) and 16 barriers (eg, lack of multidisciplinary approach in caring for DFU, lack of direct contact in care provision). Patients and HCPs reported various barriers and facilitators relating to different aspects of using digital technology in DFU management. Our findings can help inform future research as well as the adoption of digital technology in DFU management.