Search

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic imposed an acute, sharp rise in the use of video consultations (VCs) by general practitioners (GPs) in Norway. ObjectiveThis study aims to document GPs’ experiences with the large-scale uptake of VCs in the natural experiment context of the pandemic. MethodsA nationwide, cross-sectional online survey was conducted among Norwegian GPs during the pandemic lockdown (April 14-May 3, 2020). Each respondent was asked to evaluate up to 10 VCs. Basic demographic characteristics of the GPs and their practices were collected. The associations between GPs’ perceived suitability of the VCs, the nature of the patients’ main problems, prior knowledge of the patients (relational continuity), and follow-up of previously presented problems (episodic continuity) were explored using descriptive statistics, diagrams, and chi-square tests. ResultsIn total, 1237 GPs (26% of the target group) responded to the survey. Among these, 1000 GPs offered VCs, and 855 GPs evaluated a total of 3484 VCs. Most GPs who offered VCs (1000/1237; 81%) had no experience with VCs before the pandemic. Overall, 51% (1766/3476) of the evaluated VCs were considered to have similar or even better suitability to assess the main reason for contact, compared to face-to-face consultations. In the presence of relational continuity, VCs were considered equal to or better than face-to-face consultations in 57% (1011/1785) of cases, as opposed to 32% (87/274) when the patient was unknown. The suitability rate for follow-up consultations (episodic continuity) was 61% (1165/1919), compared to 35% (544/1556) for new patient problems. Suitability varied considerably across clinical contact reasons. VCs were found most suitable for anxiety and life stress, depression, and administrative purposes, as well as for longstanding or complex problems that normally require multiple follow-up consultations. The GPs estimate that they will conduct about 20% of their consultations by video in a future, nonpandemic setting. ConclusionsOur study of VCs performed in general practice during the pandemic lockdown indicates a clear future role for VCs in nonpandemic settings. The strong and consistent association between continuity of care and GPs’ perceptions of the suitability of VCs is a new and important finding with considerable relevance for future primary health care planning.

BackgroundDespite the prevalence of mobile health (mHealth) technologies and observations of their impacts on patients’ health, there is still no consensus on how best to evaluate these tools for patient self-management of chronic conditions. Researchers currently do not have guidelines on which qualitative or quantitative factors to measure or how to gather these reliable data. ObjectiveThis study aimed to document the methods and both qualitative and quantitative measures used to assess mHealth apps and systems intended for use by patients for the self-management of chronic noncommunicable diseases. MethodsA scoping review was performed, and PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and ProQuest Research Library were searched for literature published in English between January 1, 2015, and January 18, 2019. Search terms included combinations of the description of the intention of the intervention (eg, self-efficacy and self-management) and description of the intervention platform (eg, mobile app and sensor). Article selection was based on whether the intervention described a patient with a chronic noncommunicable disease as the primary user of a tool or system that would always be available for self-management. The extracted data included study design, health conditions, participants, intervention type (app or system), methods used, and measured qualitative and quantitative data. ResultsA total of 31 studies met the eligibility criteria. Studies were classified as either those that evaluated mHealth apps (ie, single devices; n=15) or mHealth systems (ie, more than one tool; n=17), and one study evaluated both apps and systems. App interventions mainly targeted mental health conditions (including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), followed by diabetes and cardiovascular and heart diseases; among the 17 studies that described mHealth systems, most involved patients diagnosed with cardiovascular and heart disease, followed by diabetes, respiratory disease, mental health conditions, cancer, and multiple illnesses. The most common evaluation method was collection of usage logs (n=21), followed by standardized questionnaires (n=18) and ad-hoc questionnaires (n=13). The most common measure was app interaction (n=19), followed by usability/feasibility (n=17) and patient-reported health data via the app (n=15). ConclusionsThis review demonstrates that health intervention studies are taking advantage of the additional resources that mHealth technologies provide. As mHealth technologies become more prevalent, the call for evidence includes the impacts on patients’ self-efficacy and engagement, in addition to traditional measures. However, considering the unstructured data forms, diverse use, and various platforms of mHealth, it can be challenging to select the right methods and measures to evaluate mHealth technologies. The inclusion of app usage logs, patient-involved methods, and other approaches to determine the impact of mHealth is an important step forward in health intervention research. We hope that this overview will become a catalogue of the possible ways in which mHealth has been and can be integrated into research practice.

BackgroundThe electronic health record (EHR) has been fully established in all Norwegian hospitals. Patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) are available to citizens aged 16 years and older through the national health portal Helsenorge. ObjectiveThis study aimed at understanding how patients use PAEHRs. Three research questions were addressed in order to explore (1) characteristics of users, (2) patients’ use of the service, and (3) patient experience with the service. MethodsWe conducted an online survey of users who had accessed their EHR online at least once through the national health portal. Patients from two of the four health regions in Norway were invited to participate. Quantitative data were supplemented by qualitative information. ResultsA total of 1037 respondents participated in the survey, most of whom used the PAEHR regularly (305/1037, 29.4%) or when necessary (303/1037, 29.2%). Service utilization was associated with self-reported health, age, gender, education, and health care professional background. Patients found the service useful to look up health information (687/778, 88.3%), keep track of their treatment (684/778, 87.9%), prepare for a hospital appointment (498/778, 64.0%), and share documents with their general practitioner (292/778, 37.5%) or family (194/778, 24.9%). Most users found it easy to access their EHR online (965/1037, 93.1%) and did not encounter technical challenges. The vast majority of respondents (643/755, 85.2%) understood the content, despite over half of them acknowledging some difficulties with medical terms or phrases. The overall satisfaction with the service was very high (700/755, 92.7%). Clinical advantages to the patients included enhanced knowledge of their health condition (565/691, 81.8%), easier control over their health status (685/740, 92.6%), better self-care (571/653, 87.4%), greater empowerment (493/674, 73.1%), easier communication with health care providers (493/618, 79.8%), and increased security (655/730, 89.7%). Patients with complex, long-term or chronic conditions seemed to benefit the most. PAEHRs were described as useful, informative, effective, helpful, easy, practical, and safe. ConclusionsPAEHRs in Norway are becoming a mature service and are perceived as useful by patients. Future studies should include experimental designs focused on specific populations or chronic conditions that are more likely to achieve clinically meaningful benefits. Continuous evaluation programs should be conducted to assess implementation and changes of wide-scale routine services over time.

BackgroundHeart failure patients with implantable defibrillators place a significant burden on health care systems. Remote monitoring allows assessment of device function and heart failure parameters, and may represent a safe, effective, and cost-saving method compared to conventional in-office follow-up. ObjectiveWe hypothesized that remote device monitoring represents a cost-effective approach. This paper summarizes the economic evaluation of the Evolution of Management Strategies of Heart Failure Patients With Implantable Defibrillators (EVOLVO) study, a multicenter clinical trial aimed at measuring the benefits of remote monitoring for heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators. MethodsTwo hundred patients implanted with a wireless transmission–enabled implantable defibrillator were randomized to receive either remote monitoring or the conventional method of in-person evaluations. Patients were followed for 16 months with a protocol of scheduled in-office and remote follow-ups. The economic evaluation of the intervention was conducted from the perspectives of the health care system and the patient. A cost-utility analysis was performed to measure whether the intervention was cost-effective in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. ResultsOverall, remote monitoring did not show significant annual cost savings for the health care system (€1962.78 versus €2130.01; P=.80). There was a significant reduction of the annual cost for the patients in the remote arm in comparison to the standard arm (€291.36 versus €381.34; P=.01). Cost-utility analysis was performed for 180 patients for whom QALYs were available. The patients in the remote arm gained 0.065 QALYs more than those in the standard arm over 16 months, with a cost savings of €888.10 per patient. Results from the cost-utility analysis of the EVOLVO study show that remote monitoring is a cost-effective and dominant solution. ConclusionsRemote management of heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators appears to be cost-effective compared to the conventional method of in-person evaluations. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00873899; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00873899 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6H0BOA29f).

During the last decades a variety of telemedicine applications have been trialed worldwide. However, telemedicine is still an example of major potential benefits that have not been fully attained. Health care regulators are still debating why institutionalizing telemedicine applications on a large scale has been so difficult and why health care professionals are often averse or indifferent to telemedicine applications, thus preventing them from becoming part of everyday clinical routines. We believe that the lack of consolidated procedures for supporting decision making by health care regulators is a major weakness.

Background and objective: Social media physical activity chatbots use both chatbots and social media platforms for physical activity promotion and, thus, could face privacy and security challenges inherent in both technologies. This study aims to provide an overview of physical activity chatbot interventions delivered via social media platforms, specifically focusing on security and privacy measures. Methods: We conducted a scoping review on this topic across 4 databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore. We extracted and summarised information on the author, population, country of study, social media platform, intervention, data processed (i.e. gathered or stored), and security/privacy measures. Results: Out of 1299 identified articles, 12 were included in the analysis reporting about 9 different chatbots. Although all chatbots applied data processing methods, only a few considered anonymisation. One paper stated compliance with the General Data Protection Regulations. Other studies enforced some verification procedures before chatbot use. Conclusion: Current research fails to adequately report security considerations in social media physical activity chatbot design. However, integration of chatbots into social media platforms seems to be declining, possibly due to security concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To explore Norwegian GPs' experiences with and perceived suitability of issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a mixed methods research design. An online survey with 301 respondents was combined with qualitative interviews with ten GPs. Norwegian general practice. Most GPs agreed it was difficult to assess a patient's ability to work without physical attendance for a first-time certification in remote consultations. However, extending a certification was considered less problematic. If physical examinations were required, the GPs would ask the patient to come to the office. The most suitable diagnoses for remote certification were respiratory infections and COVID-19-related diagnoses, as well as known chronic and long-term diseases. The GPs emphasized the importance of knowing both the patient and the medical problem. The GP-patient relationship could be affected by remote consultations, and there were mixed views on the impact. Many GPs found it easier to deny a request for a sickness certification in remote consultations. The GPs expressed concern about the societal costs and an increased number of certifications if remote consultations were too easily accessible. The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the findings should be interpreted in that context. Our study shows that issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations were viewed to be suitable for COVID-19 related problems, for patients the GP has met before, for the follow-up of known medical problems, and the extension of sickness certifications. Not meeting the patient face-to-face may affect the GP-patient relationship as well as make the GPs' dual role more challenging. The GPs perceived issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations as suitable when patient and health problem are known, and when the certification is an extension. Issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations can both harm and strengthen the GP-patient relationship. The GPs were aware of their social responsibility and were concerned that issuing sickness certificates in remote consultations can change their sick-listing practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To summarize the experience, performance and scientific output of long-running telemedicine networks delivering humanitarian services. Methods Nine long-running networks--those operating for five years or more--were identified and seven provided detailed information about their activities, including performance and scientific output. Information was extracted from peer-reviewed papers describing the networks' study design, effectiveness, quality, economics, provision of access to care and sustainability. The strength of the evidence was scored as none, poor, average or good. Findings The seven networks had been operating for a median of 11 years (range: 5-15). All networks provided clinical tele-consultations for humanitarian purposes using store-and-forward methods and five were also involved in some form of education. The smallest network had 15 experts and the largest had more than 500. The clinical caseload was 50 to 500 cases a year. A total of 59 papers had been published by the networks, and 44 were listed in Medline. Based on study design, the strength of the evidence was generally poor by conventional standards (e.g. 29 papers described non-controlled clinical series). Over half of the papers provided evidence of sustainability and improved access to care. Uncertain funding was a common risk factor. Conclusion Improved collaboration between networks could help attenuate the lack of resources reported by some networks and improve sustainability. Although the evidence base is weak, the networks appear to offer sustainable and clinically useful services. These findings may interest decision-makers in developing countries considering starting, supporting or joining similar telemedicine networks. Objectif Synthetiser l'experience, les performances et la production scientifique des reseaux de telemedecine a long terme offrant des services humanitaires. Methodes Neuf reseaux a long terme--operant depuis cinq ans ou plus--ont ete identifies, et sept d'entre eux ont fourni des informations detaillees sur leurs activites, notamment sur leurs performances et leur production scientifique. Les informations ont ete extraites de revues evaluees par des pairs, decrivant les reseaux aux niveaux plan d'etude, efficacite, qualite, economie, offre d'acces aux soins et durabilite. La solidite des preuves a ete evaluee comme suit: nulle, faible, moyenne ou bonne. Resultats Les sept reseaux etaient operationnels depuis en moyenne 11 ans (de 5 a 15 ans). Tousles reseaux fournissaient des teleconsultations cliniques a des fins humanitaires au moyen de methodes d'enregistrement et de retransmission, et cinq d'entre eux etaient aussi impliques dans une certaine forme d'education. Le reseau le plus petit comptait 15 experts, et le plus large, plus de 500. La charge de travail clinique allait de 50 a 500 cas par an. Au total, 59 revues avaient ete publiees par les reseaux, dont 44 repertoriees dans Medline. La solidite des preuves, basee sur le plan d'etude, etait generalement mediocre selon les normes conventionnelles (par exemple, 29 revues decrivaient des series cliniques non controlees). Plus de la moitie des revues ont prouve la durabilite et une amelioration de l'acces aux soins. Le financement incertain representait un facteur de risque courant. Conclusion Une collaboration amelioree entre les reseaux pourrait aider a attenuer le manque de ressources signale par certaines revues et a ameliorer la durabilite. Malgre la faiblesse de la base de donnees, les reseaux semblent offrir des services durables et cliniquement utiles. Ces resultats pourraient interesser les decideurs des pays en voie de developpement quant au lancement, a la prise en charge ou l'association de reseaux de telemedecine similaires. Objetivo Resumir la experiencia, el rendimiento y los resultados cientificos de las redes de telemedicina de larga trayectoria que ofrecen servicios humanitarios. Metodos Se identificaron nueve redes de larga trayectoria (aquellas que llevaban 5 anos o mas en funcionamiento). Siete de estas redes proporcionaron informacion detallada sobre sus actividades, incluyendo aspectos como el rendimiento y los resultados cientificos. La informacion se extrajo a partir de documentos con revisores externos que describian el diseno de estudio de las redes, asi como su efectividad, calidad, economia, acceso a la asistencia y sostenibilidad. La solidez probatoria se clasifico como nula, mala, normal o buena. Resultados Las siete redes llevaban una media de 11 anos en funcionamiento (intervalo: 5-15). Todas las redes proporcionaban teleconsultas clinicas con fines humanitarios utilizando metodos de almacenamiento y transmision. Cinco de ellas tambien estaban implicadas en alguna forma de educacion. La red mas pequena contaba con 15 expertos, frente a los mas de 500 de la red mas grande. El numero de casos anuales fue de entre 50 y 500. Las redes han publicado un total de 59 documentos, 44 de ellos estan recogidos en Medline. En base al diseno del estudio, la solidez probatoria fue en general mala para los estandares convencionales (por ejemplo, 29 documentos describian series clinicas no controladas). Mas de la mitad de los documentos evidenciaron la sostenibilidad y el acceso mejorado a la asistencia. La falta de certidumbre en lo relativo a la financiacion fue un factor de riesgo comun. Conclusion Una mejora de la colaboracion entre redes puede ayudar a atenuar la falta de recursos observada en algunas redes, asi como a mejorar la sostenibilidad. Aunque la base probatoria es debil, las redes parecen ofrecer servicios sostenibles y clinicamente utiles. Estos resultados pueden ser interesantes para los responsables politicos en paises en vias de desarrollo, para la puesta en marcha, el apoyo o la adhesion a redes de telemedicina similares., Introduction Telemedicine (i.e. medicine practised at a distance) has been used to improve health care delivery in a wide range of applications. To date, most of the work has taken [...]

Rationale: Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective treatment for people with chronic respiratory disease but is delivered to <5% of eligible individuals. This study investigated whether home-based telerehabilitation was equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation in people with chronic respiratory disease.Methods: A multicentre randomised controlled trial with assessor blinding, powered for equivalence was undertaken. Individuals with a chronic respiratory disease referred to pulmonary rehabilitation at four participating sites (one rural) were eligible and randomised using concealed allocation to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation. Both programmes were two times per week for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire Dyspnoea (CRQ-D) domain at end-rehabilitation, with a prespecified equivalence margin of 2.5 points. Follow-up was at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included exercise capacity, health-related quality of life, symptoms, self-efficacy and psychological well-being.Results: 142 participants were randomised to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation with 96% and 97% included in the intention-to-treat analysis, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups for any outcome at either time point. Both groups achieved meaningful improvement in dyspnoea and exercise capacity at end-rehabilitation. However, we were unable to confirm equivalence of telerehabilitation for the primary outcome ΔCRQ-D at end-rehabilitation (mean difference (MD) (95% CI) -1 point (-3 to 1)), and inferiority of telerehabilitation could not be excluded at either time point (12-month follow-up: MD -1 point (95% CI -4 to 1)). At end-rehabilitation, telerehabilitation demonstrated equivalence for 6-minute walk distance (MD -6 m, 95% CI -26 to 15) with possibly superiority of telerehabilitation at 12 months (MD 14 m, 95% CI -10 to 38).Conclusion: telerehabilitation may not be equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation for all outcomes, but is safe and achieves clinically meaningful benefits. When centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation is not available, telerehabilitation may provide an alternative programme model.Trial Registration Number: ACtelerehabilitationN12616000360415. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Today there is much debate about why telemedicine has stalled. Teleradiology is the only widespread telemedicine application. Other telemedicine applications appear to be promising candidates for widespread use, but they remain in the early adoption stage. The objective of this debate paper is to achieve a better understanding of the adoption of telemedicine, to assist those trying to move applications from pilot stage to routine delivery. Discussion We have investigated the reasons why telemedicine has stalled by focusing on two, high-level topics: 1) the process of adoption of telemedicine in comparison with other technologies; and 2) the factors involved in the widespread adoption of telemedicine. For each topic, we have formulated hypotheses. First, the advantages for users are the crucial determinant of the speed of adoption of technology in healthcare. Second, the adoption of telemedicine is similar to that of other health technologies and follows an S-shaped logistic growth curve. Third, evidence of cost-effectiveness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the widespread adoption of telemedicine. Fourth, personal incentives for the health professionals involved in service provision are needed before the widespread adoption of telemedicine will occur. Summary The widespread adoption of telemedicine is a major -- and still underdeveloped -- challenge that needs to be strengthened through new research directions. We have formulated four hypotheses, which are all susceptible to experimental verification. In particular, we believe that data about the adoption of telemedicine should be collected from applications implemented on a large-scale, to test the assumption that the adoption of telemedicine follows an S-shaped growth curve. This will lead to a better understanding of the process, which will in turn accelerate the adoption of new telemedicine applications in future. Research is also required to identify suitable financial and professional incentives for potential telemedicine users and understand their importance for widespread adoption.

Abstract Background Nowadays, new organisational strategies should be indentified to improve primary care and its link with secondary care in terms of efficacy and timeliness of interventions thus preventing unnecessary hospital accesses and costs saving for the health system. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of the use of teleconsultation by general practitioners in rural areas. Methods General practitioners were provided with a teleconsultation service from 2006 to 2008 to obtain a second opinion for cardiac, dermatological and diabetic problems. Access, acceptance, organisational impact, effectiveness and economics data were collected. Clinical and access data were systematically entered in a database while acceptance and organisational data were evaluated through ad hoc questionnaires. Results There were 957 teleconsultation contacts which resulted in access to health care services for 812 symptomatic patients living in 30 rural communities. Through the teleconsultation service, 48 general practitioners improved the appropriateness of primary care and the integration with secondary care. In fact, the level of concordance between intentions and consultations for cardiac problems was equal to 9%, in 86% of the cases the service entailed a saving of resources and in 5% of the cases, it improved the timeliness. 95% of the GPs considered the overall quality positively. For a future routine use of this service, trust in specialists, duration and workload of teleconsultations and reimbursement should be taken into account. Conclusions Managerial and policy implications emerged mainly related to the support to GPs in the provision of high quality primary care and decision-making processes in promoting similar services.

Objectives To explore patients’ use and experiences with four digital health services implemented in Norway to enable electronic communication between patients and their general practitioner (GP): (1) electronic booking of appointments; (2) electronic prescription renewal; (3) electronic contact with the GP’s office for non-clinical inquiries; and (4) e-consultation for clinical inquiries. Design An online survey consisting of quantitative data supplemented by qualitative information was conducted to explore: (1) characteristics of the users; (2) use; (3) experiences, perceived benefits and satisfaction; and (4) time spent using the digital health services. Setting Primary care. Participants 2043 users of the digital health services answering the survey. Results There was a higher proportion of women, younger adults and digitally active citizens with high education. Electronic booking of appointments was the most used service (66.4%), followed by electronic prescription renewal (54.3%). Most users (80%) could more easily and efficiently book an appointment electronically than by phone. Over 90% of the respondents thought that it was easier to renew a prescription electronically, 76% obtained a better overview of their medications and 46% reported higher compliance. For non-clinical inquiries, most respondents (60%) thought that it was easier to write electronic messages than communicate by phone. For clinical enquiries, many patients agreed that e-consultation could lead to a better followup (72%) and improved quality of treatment (58%). Users were highly satisfied with the services and recommended their use to others. Time saving was the most evident benefit for patients. This was confirmed by the differences in time spent using the digital health services compared with conventional approaches, all found to be statistically significant. Conclusion Citizens using e-consultation and other digital health services with their GP in Norway are satisfied and consider them as useful and efficient alternatives to conventional approaches [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]