"In my age, we didn't have the computers": Using a complexity lens to understand uptake of diabetes eHealth innovations into primary care-A qualitative study

Impacts of Clinical Decision Support Systems on the Relationship, Communication, and Shared Decision-Making Between Health Care Professionals and Patients: Multistakeholder Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are increasingly being introduced into various domains of health care. Little is known so far about the impact of such systems on the health care professional-patient relationship, and there is a lack of agreement about whether and how patients should be informed about the use of CDSSs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore, in an empirically informed manner, the potential implications for the health care professional-patient relationship and to underline the importance of this relationship when using CDSSs for both patients and future professionals.

METHODS

Using a methodological triangulation, 15 medical students and 12 trainee nurses were interviewed in semistructured interviews and 18 patients were involved in focus groups between April 2021 and April 2022. All participants came from Germany. Three examples of CDSSs covering different areas of health care (ie, surgery, nephrology, and intensive home care) were used as stimuli in the study to identify similarities and differences regarding the use of CDSSs in different fields of application. The interview and focus group transcripts were analyzed using a structured qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

From the interviews and focus groups analyzed, three topics were identified that interdependently address the interactions between patients and health care professionals: (1) CDSSs and their impact on the roles of and requirements for health care professionals, (2) CDSSs and their impact on the relationship between health care professionals and patients (including communication requirements for shared decision-making), and (3) stakeholders' expectations for patient education and information about CDSSs and their use.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that using CDSSs could restructure established power and decision-making relationships between (future) health care professionals and patients. In addition, respondents expected that the use of CDSSs would involve more communication, so they anticipated an increased time commitment. The results shed new light on the existing discourse by demonstrating that the anticipated impact of CDSSs on the health care professional-patient relationship appears to stem less from the function of a CDSS and more from its integration in the relationship. Therefore, the anticipated effects on the relationship between health care professionals and patients could be specifically addressed in patient information about the use of CDSSs.

Usability of Telehealth Systems for Noncommunicable Diseases in Primary Care From the COVID-19 Pandemic Onward: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth was expanded without the opportunity to extensively evaluate the adopted technology's usability.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to synthesize evidence on health professionals' perceptions regarding the usability of telehealth systems in the primary care of individuals with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs; hypertension and diabetes) from the COVID-19 pandemic onward.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of clinical trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective observational studies, and studies that used qualitative data collection and analysis methods published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese from March 2020 onward. The databases queried were MEDLINE, Embase, BIREME, IEEE Xplore, BVS, Google Scholar, and grey literature. Studies involving health professionals who used telehealth systems in primary care and managed patients with NCDs from the COVID-19 pandemic onward were considered eligible. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed. Data were extracted to provide a narrative qualitative evidence synthesis of the included articles. The risk of bias and methodological quality of the included studies were analyzed. The primary outcome was the usability of telehealth systems, while the secondary outcomes were satisfaction and the contexts in which the telehealth system was used.

RESULTS

We included 11 of 417 retrieved studies, which had data from 248 health care professionals. These health care professionals were mostly doctors and nurses with prior experience in telehealth in high- and middle-income countries. Overall, 9 studies (82%) were qualitative studies and 2 (18%) were quasiexperimental or multisite trial studies. Moreover, 7 studies (64%) addressed diabetes, 1 (9%) addressed diabetes and hypertension, and 3 (27%) addressed chronic diseases. Most studies used a survey to assess usability. With a moderate confidence level, we concluded that health professionals considered the usability of telehealth systems to be good and felt comfortable and satisfied. Patients felt satisfied using telehealth. The most important predictor for using digital health technologies was ease of use. The main barriers were technological challenges, connectivity issues, low computer literacy, inability to perform complete physical examination, and lack of training. Although the usability of telehealth systems was considered good, there is a need for research that investigates factors that may influence the perceptions of telehealth usability, such as differences between private and public services; differences in the level of experience of professionals, including professional experience and experience with digital tools; and differences in gender, age groups, occupations, and settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated incredible demand for virtual care. Professionals' favorable perceptions of the usability of telehealth indicate that it can facilitate access to quality care. Although there are still challenges to telehealth, more than infrastructure challenges, the most reported challenges were related to empowering people for digital health.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021296887; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=296887.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.21801/ppcrj.2022.82.6.

Application of complexity theory in health and social care research: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Complexity theory has been chosen by many authors as a suitable lens through which to examine health and social care. Despite its potential value, many empirical investigations apply the theory in a tokenistic manner without engaging with its underlying concepts and underpinnings.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this scoping review is to synthesise the literature on empirical studies that have centred on the application of complexity theory to understand health and social care provision.

METHODS

This scoping review considered primary research using complexity theory-informed approaches, published in English between 2012 and 2021. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PSYCHINFO, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Health Economic Evaluations Database were searched. In addition, a manual search of the reference lists of relevant articles was conducted. Data extraction was conducted using Covidence software and a data extraction form was created to produce a descriptive summary of the results, addressing the objectives and research question. The review used the revised Arksey and O'Malley framework and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).

RESULTS

2021 studies were initially identified with a total of 61 articles included for extraction. Complexity theory in health and social care research is poorly defined and described and was most commonly applied as a theoretical and analytical framework. The full breadth of the health and social care continuum was not represented in the identified articles, with the majority being healthcare focused.

DISCUSSION

Complexity theory is being increasingly embraced in health and care research. The heterogeneity of the literature regarding the application of complexity theory made synthesis challenging. However, this scoping review has synthesised the most recent evidence and contributes to translational systems research by providing guidance for future studies.

CONCLUSION

The study of complex health and care systems necessitates methods of interpreting dynamic prcesses which requires qualitative and longitudinal studies with abductive reasoning. The authors provide guidance on conducting complexity-informed primary research that seeks to promote rigor and transparency in the area.

REGISTRATION

The scoping review protocol was registered at Open Science Framework, and the review protocol was published at BMJ Open (https://bit.ly/3Ex1Inu).

A bibliometric analysis on global eHealth

Background

The current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic highlights the potential of eHealth. Drawing the knowledge map of eHealth research through data mining and visual analysis technology was helpful to systematically present the research status and future trends of global academic circles.

Methods

Based on the web of Science Core Collection (SCIE/SSCI) database, using bibliometric theory and visual analysis technology, this work analyzed the global eHealth research publications from 2000 to 2021, and introduced the interdisciplinary characteristics, hot topics and future trends in this field.

Results

A total of 10188 authors, 891 journals, 3586 institutions, 98 countries using 12 languages had conducted eHealth research in the world. The United States, the Netherlands, Australia and the United Kingdom were the main forces and international cooperation. However, the international co-operation between Eastern and Western countries was still relatively few. The frontier of global eHealth research mainly focused on #0eHealth innovation, #1physical activity, #2generalised anxiety disorder, #3lightweight authentication protocol, #4 eHealth information, #5technology readiness, #6 ehealth literacy scale, #7family carer, #8citance analysis, #9 guiding patient. Clusters #3 lightweight authentication protocol and #9 guiding patient were the latest clusters, indicating the research trend and direction of eHealth in the future.

Conclusions

Cooperation network framework at the regional, national and global levels and the cooperation of multidisciplinary teams with complementary backgrounds and expertise were needed to realize the in-depth popularization and application of eHealth knowledge. Interdisciplinary international cooperation should be the trend of eHealth research in the future.