Abstract
BackgroundeHealth is a broad term referring to the application of information and communication technologies in the health sector, ranging from health records to medical consultations (telemedicine) and multiple forms of health education, support, and tools. By providing increased and anytime access to information, opportunities to exchange experiences with others, and self-management support, eHealth has been heralded as transformational. It has the potential to accelerate the shift from traditional "passive patient" to an informed, engaged, and empowered "patient as partner," equipped to take part in shared decision-making, and take personal responsibility for self-managing their illness.ObjectiveThe objective of our study is to examine how people with chronic illness use eHealth in their daily lives, how it affects patient-provider relationships, and the ethical and practical ramifications for patients, providers, and service delivery.MethodsThis two-phase qualitative study is ongoing. We will purposively sample 60-70 participants in British Columbia, Canada. To be eligible, patient participants have to have arthritis and at least one other chronic health condition; health care providers (HCPs) need a caseload of patients with multi-morbidity (>25%). To date we have recruited 36 participants (18 patients, 18 HCPs). The participants attended 7 focus groups (FGs), 4 with patients and 3 with rehabilitation professionals and physicians. We interviewed 4 HCPs who were unable to attend a FG. In phase 2, we will build on FG findings and conduct 20-24 interviews with equal numbers of patients and HCPs (rehabilitation professionals and physicians). As in the FGs conducted in phase I, the interviews will use a semistructured, but flexible, discussion guide. All discussions are being audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Constant comparisons and a narrative approach guides the analyses. A relational ethics conceptual lens is being applied to the data to identify emergent ethical issues.ResultsThis study explores ethical issues in eHealth. Our goal is to identify the role of eHealth in the lives of people with multiple chronic health conditions and to explore how eHealth impacts the patient role, self-managing, and the patient-HCP relationship. The ethical lens facilitates a systematic critical analysis of emergent ethical issues for further investigation and pinpoints areas of practice that require interventions as eHealth develops and use increases both within and outside of the clinical setting.ConclusionsThe potential benefits and burdens of eHealth need to be identified before an ethical framework can be devised.
Highlights
Primary Inst./Inst. principal: Other Related Inst./ Autres inst. connexes: Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis Health Services and Policy Research
Peer Review Committee Recommendation, for your information and use/ Recommandation du comité d'examen par les pairs, pour fins d'information et d'utilisation: Committee/Comité: Catalyst Grant: New Investigators and Mid-Career Investigators Transitioning into Ethics
The final funding decision will be communicated in the Notice of Decision
Summary
Primary Inst./Inst. principal: Other Related Inst./ Autres inst. connexes: Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis Health Services and Policy Research. Une demande cotée en dessous de 3,5 n'est pas admissible au financement des IRSC. Institution paid/ Établissement payé: Title/Titre: Primary Inst./ Inst. Connexes: University of British Columbia Exploring E-health ethics and multi-morbidity Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis Health Services and Policy Research. Competition Outcome/Résultats du concours: Number in competition/Nbre de demandes dans le concours: Number approved/Nbre de demandes approuvées: Decision on your application/ Décision sur votre demande: Average annual amount/ Montant annuel moyen: Equipment amount/ Montant pour les appareils: Term/Durée: Approved. Application rank within the competition/ Rang de la demande dans ce concours: Percent Rank Within the Competition/ Rang en pourcentage au sein du concours: Rating/ Cote: Recommended average annual amount/ Montant annuel moyen recommandé: Recommended equipment amount/ Montant recommandé pour les appareils:. / Les demandes qui ont reçu une note inférieure à 3.5 pour n'importe quel des critères d'évaluation ne sont pas admissibles. Le paiement officiel est indiqué sur l'autorisation de financement des IRSC
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.