eHealth In Primary Care Research Articles

Perspectives on Promoting Physical Activity Using eHealth in Primary Care by Health Care Professionals and Individuals With Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: Qualitative Study.

The trend of an exponential increase in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes (T2D) is projected to continue rising worldwide. Physical activity could help prevent T2D and the progression and complications of the disease. Therefore, we need to create opportunities for individuals to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to self-manage their chronic condition through physical activity. eHealth is a potential resource that could facilitate self-management and thus improve population health. However, there is limited research on users' perception of eHealth in promoting physical activity in primary care settings. This study aims to explore the perspectives of health care professionals and individuals with prediabetes and T2D on eHealth to promote physical activity in primary care. A qualitative approach was applied using focus group discussions among individuals with prediabetes or T2D (14 participants in four groups) and health care professionals (10 participants in two groups). The discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis was used inductively to code the data. Three main categories emerged: utility, adoption process, and accountability. The utility of eHealth was described as a motivational, entertaining, and stimulating tool. Registration of daily medical measurements and lifestyle parameters in a cohesive digital platform was recognized as a potential resource for strengthening self-management skills. The adoption process includes eHealth to increase the accessibility of care and personalize the support of physical activity. However, participants stated that digital technology might only suit some and could increase health care providers' administrative burden. Accountability refers to the knowledge and skills to optimize eHealth and ensure data integrity and security. People with prediabetes and T2D and health care professionals positively viewed an integration of eHealth technology in primary care to promote physical activity. A cohesive platform using personal metrics, goal-setting, and social support to promote physical activity was suggested. This study identified eHealth illiteracy, inequality, privacy, confidentiality, and an increased workload on health care professionals as factors of concern when integrating eHealth into primary care. Continuous development of eHealth competence was reported as necessary to optimize the implementation of eHealth technology in primary care.

FHH Quick App Review: How Can a Quality Review Process Assist Primary Care Providers in Choosing a Family Health History App for Patient Care?

Family health history (FHH) is a data type serving risk assessment, diagnosis, research, and preventive health. Despite technological leaps in genomic variant detection, FHH remains the most accessible, least expensive, and most practical assessment tool for assessing risks attributable to genetic inheritance. The purpose of this manuscript is to outline a process to assist primary care professionals in choosing FHH digital tools for patient care based on the new ISO/TS 82304-2 Technical Specification (TS), which is a recently developed method to determine eHealth app quality. With a focus on eHealth in primary care, we applied the quality label concept to FHH, and how a primary care physician can quickly review the quality and reliability of an FHH app. Based on our review of the ISO TS’s 81 questions, we compiled a list of 25 questions that are recommended to be more succinct as an initial review. We call this process the FHH Quick App Review. Our ‘informative-only’ 25 questions do not produce a quality score, but a guide to complete an initial review of FHH apps. Most of the questions are straight from the ISO TS, some are modified or de novo. We believe the 25 questions are not only relevant to FHH app reviews but could also serve to aid app development and clinical implementation.

Digital medicine and e-health in primary care. Selected abstracts from the virtual 90th EGPRN conference, 16–17 October 2020

Digital medicine and e-health in primary care. Selected abstracts from the virtual 90th EGPRN conference, 16–17 October 2020

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 5: A critical appraisal of five widely used eHealth applications for primary care – opportunities and challenges

Background Given the pressure on modern healthcare systems, eHealth can offer valuable opportunities. However, understanding the potential and challenges of eHealth in daily practice can be challenging for many general practitioners (GPs) and their staff. Objectives To critically appraise five widely used eHealth applications, in relation to safe, evidence-based and high-quality eHealth. Using these applications as examples, we aim to increase understanding of eHealth among GPs and highlight the opportunities and challenges presented by eHealth. Discussion eHealth applications can support patients while increasing efficiency for GPs. A three-way division (inform, monitor, track; interaction; data utilisation) characterises many eHealth applications, with an increasing degree of complexity depending on the domain. All applications provide information and some have extra functionalities that promote interaction, while data analysis and artificial intelligence may be applied to support or (fully) automate care processes. Applications in the inform domain are relatively easy to use and implement but their impact on clinical outcomes may be limited. More demanding applications, in terms of privacy and ethical aspects, are found in the data utilisation domain and may potentially have a more significant impact on care processes and patient outcomes. When selecting and implementing eHealth applications, we recommend that GPs remain critical regarding preconditions on safe, evidence-based and high-quality eHealth, particularly in the case of more complex applications in the data utilisation domain.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 4: Addressing the challenges of implementation

Background The implementation of eHealth applications in primary care remains challenging. Enhancing knowledge and awareness of implementation determinants is critical to build evidence-based implementation strategies and optimise uptake and sustainability. Objectives We consider how evidence-based implementation strategies can be built to support eHealth implementation. Discussion What implementation strategies to consider depends on (potential) barriers and facilitators to eHealth implementation in a given situation. Therefore, we first discuss key barriers and facilitators following the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Cost is identified as a critical barrier to eHealth implementation. Privacy, security problems, and a lack of recognised standards for eHealth applications also hinder implementation. Engagement of key stakeholders in the implementation process, planning the implementation of the intervention, and the availability of training and support are important facilitators. To support care professionals and researchers, we provide a stepwise approach to develop and apply evidence-based implementation strategies for eHealth in primary care. It includes the following steps: (1) specify the eHealth application, (2) define problem, (3) specify desired implementation behaviour, and (4) choose and (5) evaluate the implementation strategy. To improve the fit of the implementation strategy with the setting, the stepwise approach considers the phase of the implementation process and the specific context. Conclusion Applying an approach, as provided here, may help to improve the implementation of eHealth applications in primary care.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 3: eHealth education in primary care

Background Education is essential to the integration of eHealth into primary care, but eHealth is not yet embedded in medical education. Objectives In this opinion article, we aim to support organisers of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and teachers delivering medical vocational training by providing recommendations for eHealth education. First, we describe what is required to help primary care professionals and trainees learn about eHealth. Second, we elaborate on how eHealth education might be provided. Discussion We consider four essential topics. First, an understanding of existing evidence-based eHealth applications and conditions for successful development and implementation. Second, required digital competencies of providers and patients. Third, how eHealth changes patient-provider and provider-provider relationships and finally, understanding the handling of digital data. Educational activities to address these topics include eLearning, blended learning, courses, simulation exercises, real-life practice, supervision and reflection, role modelling and community of practice learning. More specifically, a CanMEDS framework aimed at defining curriculum learning goals can support eHealth education by describing roles and required competencies. Alternatively, Kern’s conceptual model can be used to design eHealth training programmes that match the educational needs of the stakeholders using eHealth. Conclusion Vocational and CPD training in General Practice needs to build on eHealth capabilities now. We strongly advise the incorporation of eHealth education into vocational training and CPD activities, rather than providing it as a separate single module. How learning goals and activities take shape and how competencies are evaluated clearly requires further practice, evaluation and study.

Implementing complaint-directed mini-interventions for depressive complaints in primary care to increase participation among patients with a lower socioeconomic status: design of a cluster randomised controlled trial

BackgroundDepression is a major public health concern. E-health interventions for preventing and reducing depressive complaints have proven to be effective, and have the potential to make (mental) health care more accessible and efficient. However, the reach of these interventions needs to be improved, especially among people with a lower socioeconomic status (SES). Stimulating and supporting implementation of e-health in primary care, and offering guidance from general practice nurses (GP nurses) may be important strategies to achieve this.Methods/designThe online ‘Complaint Directed Mini-Interventions’ (CDMIs) for stress, sleep and worry complaints, which were found to be (cost-)effective in a self-guided format, will be implemented in the primary care setting using a blended care format (i.e. combining e-health with face-to-face sessions) with minimal guidance provided by the GP nurse. The main aim is to evaluate whether a SES-sensitive implementation strategy improves the participation rate (i.e. reach) of lower-SES patients in the blended online CDMIs as compared to a regular implementation strategy in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Randomisation will occur at the level of the GP nurse, and 228 patients will be included in the study. The primary outcome is the participation rate (completing at least one face-to-face session and two online exercises) of the lower-SES target group. It is hypothesised that this percentage will be higher in the SES-sensitive group as compared to the regular group. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the implementation process, to monitor and evaluate psychological complaints (depression, sleep, stress, worry and anxiety) and well-being over time. Patient assessments will take place at baseline, 3 and 12 months post baseline.DiscussionThis study should contribute to our knowledge of reaching the lower-SES groups with a brief and complaint-specific blended approach for depressive complaints in primary care. It should also further our knowledge on successful strategies to implement depression prevention in primary care.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register, ID: NL6595. Registered on 12 November 2017.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 2: Exploring the ethical implications of its application in primary care practice

Background eHealth promises to increase self-management and personalised medicine and improve cost-effectiveness in primary care. Paired with these promises are ethical implications, as eHealth will affect patients’ and primary care professionals’ (PCPs) experiences, values, norms, and relationships. Objectives We argue what ethical implications related to the impact of eHealth on four vital aspects of primary care could (and should) be anticipated. Discussion (1) EHealth influences dealing with predictive and diagnostic uncertainty. Machine-learning based clinical decision support systems offer (seemingly) objective, quantified, and personalised outcomes. However, they also introduce new loci of uncertainty and subjectivity. The decision-making process becomes opaque, and algorithms can be invalid, biased, or even discriminatory. This has implications for professional responsibilities and judgments, justice, autonomy, and trust. (2) EHealth affects the roles and responsibilities of patients because it can stimulate self-management and autonomy. However, autonomy can also be compromised, e.g. in cases of persuasive technologies and eHealth can increase existing health disparities. (3) The delegation of tasks to a network of technologies and stakeholders requires attention for responsibility gaps and new responsibilities. (4) The triangulate relationship: patient–eHealth–PCP requires a reconsideration of the role of human interaction and ‘humanness’ in primary care as well as of shaping Shared Decision Making. Conclusion Our analysis is an essential first step towards setting up a dedicated ethics research agenda that should be examined in parallel to the development and implementation of eHealth. The ultimate goal is to inspire the development of practice-specific ethical recommendations.

SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 1: Concepts, conditions and challenges

Primary care is challenged to provide high quality, accessible and affordable care for an increasingly ageing, complex, and multimorbid population. To counter these challenges, primary care professionals need to take up new and innovative practices, including eHealth. eHealth applications hold the promise to overcome some difficulties encountered in the care of people with complex medical and social needs in primary care. However, many unanswered questions regarding (cost) effectiveness, integration with healthcare, and acceptability to patients, caregivers, and professionals remain to be elucidated. What conditions need to be met? What challenges need to be overcome? What downsides must be dealt with? This first paper in a series on eHealth in primary care introduces basic concepts and examines opportunities for the uptake of eHealth in primary care. We illustrate that although the potential of eHealth in primary care is high, several conditions need to be met to ensure that safe and high-quality eHealth is developed for and implemented in primary care. eHealth research needs to be optimized; ensuring evidence-based eHealth is available. Blended care, i.e. combining face-to-face care with remote options, personalized to the individual patient should be considered. Stakeholders need to be involved in the development and implementation of eHealth via co-creation processes, and design should be mindful of vulnerable groups and eHealth illiteracy. Furthermore, a global perspective on eHealth should be adopted, and eHealth ethics, patients’ safety and privacy considered.

Opinión de los facultativos y usuarios sobre avances de la e-salud en atención primaria

ObjectiveTo find out the opinions of users and primary care doctors on the progress of e-health in primary care. DesignFocus groups set up between 1st May and 25th September 2018. LocationPrimary care level in regional online health services. ParticipantsA total of 29 users and 33 primary care doctors linked to primary care that were contacted, through user associations and regional public health services, respectively. MethodInductive analysis of transcripts from focus groups about the following issues: accessibility and security; efficiency; information and technical problems; potentialities. ResultsOnline health services are positively valued in terms of cost savings both by users and doctors of primary care. Nevertheless, face-to-face interaction is still considered a key factor in the quality of service. When it comes to the access and provision of e-health services, there is shared concern for the security of the data and for the training deficiencies of users and doctors. An adequate design of the applications becomes a condition for the acceptance and diffusion of technologies that support online health. ConclusionsHealth authorities should intensify the use of new technologies oriented towards easing the work of doctors, simplifying bureaucratic tasks, providing diagnostic and prescription security, and protecting data. As long as systems generate failures and mistrust, new technologies will remain to be perceived as a complement, but not as an alternative to the traditional care model.

Lessons Learned From a Living Lab on the Broad Adoption of eHealth in Primary Health Care.

BackgroundElectronic health (eHealth) solutions are considered to relieve current and future pressure on the sustainability of primary health care systems. However, evidence of the effectiveness of eHealth in daily practice is missing. Furthermore, eHealth solutions are often not implemented structurally after a pilot phase, even if successful during this phase. Although many studies on barriers and facilitators were published in recent years, eHealth implementation still progresses only slowly. To further unravel the slow implementation process in primary health care and accelerate the implementation of eHealth, a 3-year Living Lab project was set up. In the Living Lab, called eLabEL, patients, health care professionals, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and research institutes collaborated to select and integrate fully mature eHealth technologies for implementation in primary health care. Seven primary health care centers, 10 SMEs, and 4 research institutes participated.ObjectiveThis viewpoint paper aims to show the process of adoption of eHealth in primary care from the perspective of different stakeholders in a qualitative way. We provide a real-world view on how such a process occurs, including successes and failures related to the different perspectives.MethodsReflective and process-based notes from all meetings of the project partners, interview data, and data of focus groups were analyzed systematically using four theoretical models to study the adoption of eHealth in primary care.ResultsThe results showed that large-scale implementation of eHealth depends on the efforts of and interaction and collaboration among 4 groups of stakeholders: patients, health care professionals, SMEs, and those responsible for health care policy (health care insurers and policy makers). These stakeholders are all acting within their own contexts and with their own values and expectations. We experienced that patients reported expected benefits regarding the use of eHealth for self-management purposes, and health care professionals stressed the potential benefits of eHealth and were interested in using eHealth to distinguish themselves from other care organizations. In addition, eHealth entrepreneurs valued the collaboration among SMEs as they were not big enough to enter the health care market on their own and valued the collaboration with research institutes. Furthermore, health care insurers and policy makers shared the ambition and need for the development and implementation of an integrated eHealth infrastructure.ConclusionsFor optimal and sustainable use of eHealth, patients should be actively involved, primary health care professionals need to be reinforced in their management, entrepreneurs should work closely with health care professionals and patients, and the government needs to focus on new health care models stimulating innovations. Only when all these parties act together, starting in local communities with a small range of eHealth tools, the potential of eHealth will be enforced.

National health models and the adoption of eHealth and ePrescribing in primary care – new evidence from Europe

ObjectiveRecent research from the European Commission (EC) suggests that the development and adoption of eHealth in primary care is significantly influenced by the context of the national health model in...

Expectations and experiences of eHealth in primary care: A qualitative practice-based investigation

Objectives (1) To assess expectations and experiences of a new eHealth service by patients and staff in three primary care settings; (2) to ascertain attitudes to a range of future, primary care-oriented eHealth services. Design Qualitative case study. Setting Three UK general practices introducing an eHealth service for booking patient appointments. Participants Ninety patients purposively selected from users and non-users of the new service and 28 staff (clinicians, management and administrative staff). Results Actual patient use of the service was lower than stated intention. Patients and staff felt that more active promotion of the service would have resulted in more use. Low usage did not result in a negative assessment of the service by most staff. Different patient groupings were identified with characteristics that may be used as predictors of eHealth service use and indicators of training needs. GPs and patients expressed opposing viewpoints on a range of future eHealth services. Conclusions Take-up of eHealth services may be lower than expected. To overcome patient barriers, factors that may narrow the intention–behaviour gap such as level of service promotion, GP endorsement, and usage by different patient groups, should be investigated. For clinician barriers, the eHealth evidence base needs strengthening, while for primary care practices, a learning process including staff training needs to be instituted. The differing views of patients and GPs about components of eHealth means that policymakers need to plan for a lengthy political process to obtain agreement on contentious issues if they are to achieve successful eHealth services.