22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      eHealth for people with multimorbidity: Results from the ICARE4EU project and insights from the “10 e’s” by Gunther Eysenbach

      research-article
      * , , , on behalf of ICARE4EU Consortium
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          People with multimorbidity, especially older people, have complex health and social needs, and require an integrated care approach. In this respect, eHealth could be of support. This paper aims to describe the implementation of eHealth technologies in integrated care programs for people with multimorbidity in Europe, and to analyse related benefits and barriers according to outcomes from ICARE4EU study and within the more general conceptual framework of the 10 e's” in eHealth by Gunther Eysenbach.

          Methods

          In 2014, ICARE4EU project identified 101 integrated care programs in 24 European countries. Expert organizations and managers of the programs completed an on-line questionnaire addressing several aspects including the adoption of eHealth. Findings from this questionnaire were analyzed, by linking in particular benefits and barriers of eHealth with the “10 e's” by Eysenbach (Efficiency, Enhancing, Evidence-based, Empowerment, Encouragement, Education, Enabling, Extending, Ethics, and Equity).

          Results

          Out of 101 programs, 85 adopted eHealth tools, of which 42 focused explicitly on older people. eHealth could improve care integration/management, quality of care/life and cost-efficiency, whereas inadequate funding represents a major barrier. The “10 e's” by Eysenbach seem to show contact points with ICARE4EU findings, in particular when referring to positive aspects of eHealth such as Efficiency and Enhancing quality of care/life, although Empowerment/Education of patients, care Equity and Ethics issues seem crucial in this respect. Encouragement of a new relationship patient-health professional, and Enabling standardized exchange of electronic information, represent further aspects impacting integration/management of care.

          Conclusions

          Aspects of eHealth, which emerged as benefits and barriers impacting integration/management of care, as well as cost-efficiency and quality of care/life, can be identified on the basis of both ICARE4EU findings and the “10 e's” in eHealth by Eysenbach. They could represent objectives of new policies for supporting the deployment of eHealth technologies within integrated care across Europe.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Factors Determining the Success and Failure of eHealth Interventions: Systematic Review of the Literature

          Background eHealth has an enormous potential to improve healthcare cost, effectiveness, and quality of care. However, there seems to be a gap between the foreseen benefits of research and clinical reality. Objective Our objective was to systematically review the factors influencing the outcome of eHealth interventions in terms of success and failure. Methods We searched the PubMed database for original peer-reviewed studies on implemented eHealth tools that reported on the factors for the success or failure, or both, of the intervention. We conducted the systematic review by following the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome framework, with 2 of the authors independently reviewing the abstract and full text of the articles. We collected data using standardized forms that reflected the categorization model used in the qualitative analysis of the outcomes reported in the included articles. Results Among the 903 identified articles, a total of 221 studies complied with the inclusion criteria. The studies were heterogeneous by country, type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The article frequency analysis did not show a significant discrepancy between the number of reports on failure (392/844, 46.5%) and on success (452/844, 53.6%). The qualitative analysis identified 27 categories that represented the factors for success or failure of eHealth interventions. A quantitative analysis of the results revealed the category quality of healthcare (n=55) as the most mentioned as contributing to the success of eHealth interventions, and the category costs (n=42) as the most mentioned as contributing to failure. For the category with the highest unique article frequency, workflow (n=51), we conducted a full-text review. The analysis of the 23 articles that met the inclusion criteria identified 6 barriers related to workflow: workload (n=12), role definition (n=7), undermining of face-to-face communication (n=6), workflow disruption (n=6), alignment with clinical processes (n=2), and staff turnover (n=1). Conclusions The reviewed literature suggested that, to increase the likelihood of success of eHealth interventions, future research must ensure a positive impact in the quality of care, with particular attention given to improved diagnosis, clinical management, and patient-centered care. There is a critical need to perform in-depth studies of the workflow(s) that the intervention will support and to perceive the clinical processes involved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Macroeconomic implications of population ageing and selected policy responses.

            Between now and 2030, every country will experience population ageing-a trend that is both pronounced and historically unprecedented. Over the past six decades, countries of the world had experienced only a slight increase in the share of people aged 60 years and older, from 8% to 10%. But in the next four decades, this group is expected to rise to 22% of the total population-a jump from 800 million to 2 billion people. Evidence suggests that cohorts entering older age now are healthier than previous ones. However, progress has been very uneven, as indicated by the wide gaps in population health (measured by life expectancy) between the worst (Sierra Leone) and best (Japan) performing countries, now standing at a difference of 36 years for life expectancy at birth and 15 years for life expectancy at age 60 years. Population ageing poses challenges for countries' economies, and the health of older populations is of concern. Older people have greater health and long-term care needs than younger people, leading to increased expenditure. They are also less likely to work if they are unhealthy, and could impose an economic burden on families and society. Like everyone else, older people need both physical and economic security, but the burden of providing these securities will be falling on a smaller portion of the population. Pension systems will be stressed and will need reassessment along with retirement policies. Health systems, which have not in the past been oriented toward the myriad health problems and long-term care needs of older people and have not sufficiently emphasised disease prevention, can respond in different ways to the new demographic reality and the associated changes in population health. Along with behavioural adaptations by individuals and businesses, the nature of such policy responses will establish whether population ageing will lead to major macroeconomic difficulties.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Real-World Implementation of Video Outpatient Consultations at Macro, Meso, and Micro Levels: Mixed-Method Study

              Background There is much interest in virtual consultations using video technology. Randomized controlled trials have shown video consultations to be acceptable, safe, and effective in selected conditions and circumstances. However, this model has rarely been mainstreamed and sustained in real-world settings. Objective The study sought to (1) define good practice and inform implementation of video outpatient consultations and (2) generate transferable knowledge about challenges to scaling up and routinizing this service model. Methods A multilevel, mixed-method study of Skype video consultations (micro level) was embedded in an organizational case study (meso level), taking account of national context and wider influences (macro level). The study followed the introduction of video outpatient consultations in three clinical services (diabetes, diabetes antenatal, and cancer surgery) in a National Health Service trust (covering three hospitals) in London, United Kingdom. Data sources included 36 national-level stakeholders (exploratory and semistructured interviews), longitudinal organizational ethnography (300 hours of observations; 24 staff interviews), 30 videotaped remote consultations, 17 audiotaped face-to-face consultations, and national and local documents. Qualitative data, analyzed using sociotechnical change theories, addressed staff and patient experience and organizational and system drivers. Quantitative data, analyzed via descriptive statistics, included uptake of video consultations by staff and patients and microcategorization of different kinds of talk (using the Roter interaction analysis system). Results When clinical, technical, and practical preconditions were met, video consultations appeared safe and were popular with some patients and staff. Compared with face-to-face consultations for similar conditions, video consultations were very slightly shorter, patients did slightly more talking, and both parties sometimes needed to make explicit things that typically remained implicit in a traditional encounter. Video consultations appeared to work better when the clinician and patient already knew and trusted each other. Some clinicians used Skype adaptively to respond to patient requests for ad hoc encounters in a way that appeared to strengthen supported self-management. The reality of establishing video outpatient services in a busy and financially stretched acute hospital setting proved more complex and time-consuming than originally anticipated. By the end of this study, between 2% and 22% of consultations were being undertaken remotely by participating clinicians. In the remainder, clinicians chose not to participate, or video consultations were considered impractical, technically unachievable, or clinically inadvisable. Technical challenges were typically minor but potentially prohibitive. Conclusions Video outpatient consultations appear safe, effective, and convenient for patients in situations where participating clinicians judge them clinically appropriate, but such situations are a fraction of the overall clinic workload. As with other technological innovations, some clinicians will adopt readily, whereas others will need incentives and support. There are complex challenges to embedding video consultation services within routine practice in organizations that are hesitant to change, especially in times of austerity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                14 November 2018
                2018
                : 13
                : 11
                : e0207292
                Affiliations
                [001]Centre for Socio-Economic Research on Ageing, National Institute of Health and Science on Ageing, IRCCS INRCA, Ancona, Italy
                Robert Gordon University, UNITED KINGDOM
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                ¶ Membership of the ICARE4EU Consortium is provided in the Acknowledgments

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4428-3749
                Article
                PONE-D-18-15573
                10.1371/journal.pone.0207292
                6241125
                30427924
                43dbe99b-17cb-4e4c-a3e8-c5c841cff293
                © 2018 Melchiorre et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 24 May 2018
                : 29 October 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, Pages: 26
                Funding
                Funded by: European Union (CHAFEA), Health Programme 2008-2013
                Award ID: 20121205
                Award Recipient :
                This publication arises from the project Innovating care for people with multiple chronic conditions in Europe (ICARE4EU) Project, which has received funding from the European Union, in the framework of the Health Programme 2008-2013 of the European Union, (CHAFEA, The Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, http://ec.europa.eu/chafea/), Grant number 20121205. Duration of the project: 2013-2016. This study was partially supported by Ricerca Corrente funding from Italian Ministry of Health to IRCCS INRCA. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Patients
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Quality of Care
                People and Places
                Geographical Locations
                Europe
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Finance
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Health Care Providers
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Age Groups
                Elderly
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Culture
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Quality of Life
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article