Experience of Health Care Professionals Using Digital Tools in the Hospital: Qualitative Systematic Review

Practical Recommendations for Navigating Digital Tools in Hospitals: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

The digitalization of health care organizations is an integral part of a clinician's daily life, making it vital for health care professionals (HCPs) to understand and effectively use digital tools in hospital settings. However, clinicians often express a lack of preparedness for their digital work environments. Particularly, new clinical end users, encompassing medical and nursing students, seasoned professionals transitioning to new health care environments, and experienced practitioners encountering new health care technologies, face critically intense learning periods, often with a lack of adequate time for learning digital tools, resulting in difficulties in integrating and adopting these digital tools into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to comprehensively collect advice from experienced HCPs in Switzerland to guide new clinical end users on how to initiate their engagement with health ITs within hospital settings.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews with 52 HCPs across Switzerland, representing 24 medical specialties from 14 hospitals. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through inductive thematic analysis. Codes were developed iteratively, and themes and aggregated dimensions were refined through collaborative discussions.

RESULTS

Ten themes emerged from the interview data, namely (1) digital tool understanding, (2) peer-based learning strategies, (3) experimental learning approaches, (4) knowledge exchange and support, (5) training approaches, (6) proactive innovation, (7) an adaptive technology mindset, (8) critical thinking approaches, (9) dealing with emotions, and (10) empathy and human factors. Consequently, we devised 10 recommendations with specific advice to new clinical end users on how to approach new health care technologies, encompassing the following: take time to get to know and understand the tools you are working with; proactively ask experienced colleagues; simply try it out and practice; know where to get help and information; take sufficient training; embrace curiosity and pursue innovation; maintain an open and adaptable mindset; keep thinking critically and use your knowledge base; overcome your fears, and never lose the human and patient focus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study emphasized the importance of comprehensive training and learning approaches for health care technologies based on the advice and recommendations of experienced HCPs based in Swiss hospitals. Moreover, these recommendations have implications for medical educators and clinical instructors, providing advice on effective methods to instruct and support new end users, enabling them to use novel technologies proficiently. Therefore, we advocate for new clinical end users, health care institutions and clinical instructors, academic institutions and medical educators, and regulatory bodies to prioritize effective training and cultivating technological readiness to optimize IT use in health care.

Considering User Experience and Behavioral Approaches in the Design of mHealth Interventions for Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a leading chronic cardiac disease associated with an increased risk of stroke, cardiac complications, and general mortality. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions, including wearable devices and apps, can aid in the detection, screening, and management of AF to improve patient outcomes. The inclusion of approaches that consider user experiences and behavior in the design of health care interventions can increase the usability of mHealth interventions, and hence, hopefully, yield an increase in positive outcomes in the lives of users.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to show how research has considered user experiences and behavioral approaches in designing mHealth interventions for AF detection, screening, and management; the phases of designing complex interventions from the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) were referenced: namely, identification, development, feasibility, evaluation, and implementation.

METHODS

Studies published until September 7, 2022, that examined user experiences and behavioral approaches associated with mHealth interventions in the context of AF were extracted from multiple databases. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were used.

RESULTS

A total of 2219 records were extracted, with only 55 records reporting on usability, user experiences, or behavioral approaches more widely for designing mHealth interventions in the context of AF. When mapping the studies onto the phases of the UK MRC's guidance for developing and evaluating complex interventions, the following was found: in the identification phase, there were significant differences between the needs of patients and health care workers. In the development phase, user perspectives guided the iterative development of apps, interfaces, and intervention protocols in 4 studies. Most studies (43/55, 78%) assessed the usability of interventions in the feasibility phase as an outcome, although the data collection tools were not designed together with users and stakeholders. Studies that examined the evaluation and implementation phase entailed reporting on challenges in user participation, acceptance, and workflows that could not be captured by studies in the previous phases. To realize the envisaged human behavior intended through treatment, review results highlight the scant inclusion of behavior change approaches for mHealth interventions across multiple levels of sociotechnical health care systems. While interventions at the level of the individual (micro) and the level of communities (meso) were found in the studies reviewed, no studies were found intervening at societal levels (macro). Studies also failed to consider the temporal variation of user goals and feedback in the design of long-term behavioral interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we proposed 2 contributions: first, mapping studies to different phases of the MRC framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions, and second, mapping behavioral approaches to different levels of health care systems. Finally, we discuss the wider implications of our results in guiding future mHealth research.

The Paradoxes of Digital Tools in Hospitals: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Digital tools are progressively reshaping the daily work of health care professionals (HCPs) in hospitals. While this transformation holds substantial promise, it leads to frustrating experiences, raising concerns about negative impacts on clinicians' well-being.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to comprehensively explore the lived experiences of HCPs navigating digital tools throughout their daily routines.

METHODS

Qualitative in-depth interviews with 52 HCPs representing 24 medical specialties across 14 hospitals in Switzerland were performed.

RESULTS

Inductive thematic analysis revealed 4 main themes: digital tool use, workflow and processes, HCPs' experience of care delivery, and digital transformation and management of change. Within these themes, 6 intriguing paradoxes emerged, and we hypothesized that these paradoxes might partly explain the persistence of the challenges facing hospital digitalization: the promise of efficiency and the reality of inefficiency, the shift from face to face to interface, juggling frustration and dedication, the illusion of information access and trust, the complexity and intersection of workflows and care paths, and the opportunities and challenges of shadow IT.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the central importance of acknowledging and considering the experiences of HCPs to support the transformation of health care technology and to avoid or mitigate any potential negative experiences that might arise from digitalization. The viewpoints of HCPs add relevant insights into long-standing informatics problems in health care and may suggest new strategies to follow when tackling future challenges.

Digital leadership: Norwegian healthcare managers' attitudes towards using digital tools

Background

Health services are undergoing digitalization and applying new digital tools. These changes may provide healthcare managers with opportunities to exercise digital leadership. However, managers' attitudes may influence the extent to which they demonstrate digital leadership. This study explores the attitudes of Norwegian healthcare managers towards: (1) digital tools and change and (2) to what extent digital tools are applicable to various tasks of managers.

Methods

Cross-sectional study including 154 managers in hospitals and municipal health services in a Norwegian county. The questionnaire was about management and digital tools, and the data was analyzed by descriptive statistics, correlations, and content analysis.

Results

The healthcare managers perceived that digital tools facilitated a positive change in organizational work processes aligned with values and goals. Digital tools supported administrative tasks such as gaining control over responsibilities. However, 76 managers stated that certain tasks, including interactions with employees (e.g. performance appraisals and sick leave follow-up) and the building of an organizational culture, should not be performed using digital tools or using them only to a limited extent; for these tasks, they preferred in-person meetings.

Discussion

Norwegian healthcare managers' attitudes toward digital tools are generally positive, but there are areas where they find the tools less suitable.

Conclusions

The results provide new insights into healthcare by indicating that many managers may have positive attitudes toward digital tools. However, digital leadership may not be applicable equally in all areas of healthcare managers' work. This raises the question of whether digital leadership can or should be exercised uniformly in every area of health services.