Suchergebnisse

Richard E Scott,1,2 Maurice Mars11Department of TeleHealth, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa; 2NT Consulting - Global e-Health Inc., Calgary, AB, CanadaAbstract: In a setting of constant change and confusing terminology, telehealth continues to gain ground in both developed and developing countries within the overarching milieu of e-health. Evidence shows telehealth has been used in essentially all countries of the world, but is embedded in few. Uses and needs of telehealth vary between the developed and developing world; the latter struggles with both communicable diseases and noncommunicable diseases, and with very few resources. Common clinical applications include teleconsultation, telecardiology (transmission of ECGs), teleradiology, and teledermatology. Many telehealth projects exist throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, and Africa, but there is little published evidence and only isolated examples of sustained programs, although several sustained humanitarian networks exist. Application of mobile solutions (m-health) is on the rise in many developing countries. Telehealth is still not integrated into existing health care systems globally. Reasons vary: lack of proven large-scale operations, poor evidence base, inadequate implementation, lack of attention to the "soft side" of implementation (readiness, change management), and many others. For the developing world, reasons can be more pragmatic, including limited resources, unreliable power, poor connectivity, and high cost for the poverty stricken – those most in need. Telehealth is poised to improve health and health care in the developing world, driven by both altruistic and profit motives. But to have the desired effect, telehealth must address very specific and evidence-based health "needs" of each facility, region, or country; the shortage of health workers and specialist services; and the required skills upgrading and training, allowing the developing world to establish its own critical mass of experts. This will only be achieved by raising awareness, understanding, and ability regarding telehealth capability and limitations, and by the coordinated political and professional will of all those involved to guide public and private innovation and telehealth integration.Keywords: telehealth, telemedicine, developing countries, e-health, review

Background. In KwaZulu-Natal (KZ-N), South Africa, recent reports have indicated that spontaneous use of smartphones has occurred, providing access to specialist dermatological care to remote areas. This informal use has raised a number of practical, legal, regulatory, and ethical concerns. Aim. To assess the nature and content of WhatsApp messages sent to dermatologists, to determine the referring doctors' reasons for, and satisfaction with, their interactions, as well as their knowledge of legal, regulatory, and ethical requirements. Methods. A retrospective study of WhatsApp messages between referring doctors and dermatologists, as well as a cross-sectional survey of doctors working at district hospitals in KZ-N who used IM for teledermatology. Results. Use of IM (primarily WhatsApp) for teledermatology was almost universal, but often not considered 'telemedicine'. Few referring doctors were aware of South Africa's ethical guidelines and their requirements, and few of those who did followed them, e.g., the stipulated and onerous consent process and existing privacy and security legislations. No secure methods for record keeping or data storage of WhatsApp content were used. A desire to formalize the service existed. Conclusions. Based upon these findings, it was proposed that a number of described steps be followed in order to formalize the use of IM for teledermatology.

Background: While e-health readiness assessment is vital to the successful implementation of e-health innovations, there is little published guidance (i.e. e-health readiness assessment frameworks (eHRAFs)) for institutions and countries. Objective: To develop an evidence-based and locally relevant eHRAF for Uganda. Method: A list of possible e-health readiness domains and constructs was developed through a structured review of the e-health literature. This list was first refined using author experience, insight and reflection. Based on this refined list, an eHRAF questionnaire was developed, which was initially pilot tested for face and content validity. Thereafter, it was distributed to 13 purposively selected study participants who were Ugandan e-health experts from the fields of health, information and communications technology (ICT) and academia. The questionnaire was discussed in a focus group setting for consensus input, where study participants confirmed, rejected or revised proposed domains and constructs suitable to guide e-health readiness assessment at either the national or site-specific level within Uganda. Results: Of 148 identified literature resources, 13 met inclusion criteria. A subjective review highlighted 11 frequently used e-health domains. Further reflection reduced these to nine domains, which were shared with study participants by means of the questionnaire. Based upon prior use of, and familiarity with, a management tool (PESTEL), participants' consensus on factors essential for readiness assessment in Uganda was aligned with PESTEL's six domains: political, economic, sociocultural, technological, environmental, and legal and regulatory. The participants considered engagement, and core and societal readiness as optional domains. Based on this input, the authors developed a proposed eHRAF suitable for Uganda, comprised of domains, sub-domains and constructs. Conclusion: The eHRAF developed in this research is an evidence-based framework (literature and cross-sectoral expert opinion) and consists of primary domains, sub-domains and constructs suitable for assessing e-health readiness in Uganda, either nationally or locally, prior to implementation of any e-health system. The process and principles may have utility in other countries. Implications: A national, culturally relevant, context-specific Ugandan eHRAF could facilitate efficient and effective planning and implementation of new e-health programmes across the country and assist policymakers and legislators to develop consistent and reliable guidelines and regulations.

Background: There are few telemedicine projects in Africa that have reached scale. One of the reasons proposed for this has been failure to assess health provider readiness for telemedicine prior to implementation. Objective: To assess health provider readiness for implementation and integration of telemedicine services at three levels of Uganda's health facilities, namely, a national referral hospital (NRH), regional referral hospitals (RRHs) and level 4 health centres (HC-IVs) and to investigate factors associated with readiness for telemedicine. Method: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted at public healthcare facilities in Uganda. One RRH and HC-IV was identified from each of the Western, Eastern and Northern regions using a multistage random sampling technique. Mulago Hospital, which doubles as an RRH and HC-IV in the central region, was purposively identified for the study. After validation, a questionnaire was distributed for self-administration to senior administrators and doctors selected at the NRH, RRHs and HC-IVs. Data were analysed using bivariate associations between the outcome and the potential independent variables. Results: In total, 114 healthcare workers completed the questionnaire. Of the respondents, 24 (21%) were from HC-IVs, 44 (39%) were from RRHs, and 46 (40%) from NRH. Doctors made up 45.8% (11) of respondents at HC-IVs, 59% (26) at RRHs, and 30.4% (14) at NRH. Administrators across all health facility levels were more likely to integrate telemedicine into the healthcare system than doctors (odd ratio = 1.39 [95% confidence interval = 0.38–4.95]). A significant association existed between the state of readiness and type of health facility, p < 0.001. The NRH and RRHs are more likely to integrate telemedicine into their systems than the HC-IVs. Among the factors investigated (job title, health facility, technology type, reason for referral and frequency of electronic communication), the level of health facility and title or role of healthcare worker were found to have a significant statistical association with being ready to integrate telemedicine into the healthcare system. Conclusion: Health provider readiness to integrate telemedicine services varies at the different levels of the health facility and job title or role. However, referral hospitals and administrators were more likely to integrate telemedicine than HC-IVs and doctors, respectively. While this study shows physicians and administrators are ready, other sectors (nurses, allied healthcare workers, public) will also need to be assessed.

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Instant messaging services (IMS) are widely used in medical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate perceptions regarding use and usability of IMS within clinical practice and assess users' knowledge of the ethical and legal context involved in using IMS within medical practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study conducted in different hospitals and medical institutions in Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: Medical students, medical residents, primary care physicians and specialist doctors answered an online questionnaire regarding epidemiological data, graduation level and use of IMS for medical communication. Responses were collected over a five-month period and data were assessed using the IBM-SPSS software. RESULTS: 484 people answered the questionnaire: 97.0% declared that they were using IMS for medical-related purposes; 42.0%, to elucidate medical concerns every week; 75.0%, to share imaging or laboratory tests and patients' medical records; and 90.5%, to participate in clinical case-study private groups. Moreover, only 37.0% declared that they had knowledge of the legislative aspects of use of smartphones within clinical practice. Differences in the frequency of discussion of medical concerns within the daily routine between student/residents and general practitioners/specialists, and in the frequency of image-sharing and patient-guiding/assistance between students and medical doctors, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide reliable proof that medical doctors and students use IMS, as a tool for clinical case discussions, interactions between healthcare providers and patients, or dissemination of knowledge and information. Nonetheless, because of limitations to the ethical and legal regulations, evidence-based discussions between authorities, academics and medical institutions are needed in order to fully achieve positive outcomes from such platforms.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the surveillance of patients, curb the spread of disease, facilitate timely identification and management of ill people, but, most importantly, guarantee the continuity of care of frail patients with multiple chronic diseases. Although during COVID-19 telemedicine has thrived, and its adoption has moved forward in many countries, important gaps still remain. Major issues to be addressed to enable large scale implementation of telemedicine include: (1) establishing adequate policies to legislate telemedicine, license healthcare operators, protect patients' privacy, and implement reimbursement plans; (2) creating and disseminating practical guidelines for the routine clinical use of telemedicine in different contexts; (3) increasing in the level of integration of telemedicine with traditional healthcare services; (4) improving healthcare professionals' and patients' awareness of and willingness to use telemedicine; and (5) overcoming inequalities among countries and population subgroups due to technological, infrastructural, and economic barriers. If all these requirements are met in the near future, remote management of patients will become an indispensable resource for the healthcare systems worldwide and will ultimately improve the management of patients and the quality of care.