RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: One Health (OH) refers to the integration of human, animal, and ecosystem health within one framework in the context of zoonoses, antimicrobial resistance and stewardship, and food security. Telehealth refers to distance delivery of healthcare. A systems approach is central to both One Health and telehealth, and telehealth can be a core component of One Health. Here we explain how telehealth might be integrated into One Health. METHODS: We have considered antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as a use case where both One Health and telehealth can be used for coordination among the farming sector, the veterinary services, and human health providers to mitigate the risk of AMR. We conducted a narrative review of the literature to develop a position on the inter-relationships between telehealth and One Health. We have summarised how telehealth can be incorporated within One Health. RESULTS: Clinicians have used telehealth to address antimicrobial resistance, zoonoses, food borne infection, improvement of food security and antimicrobial stewardship. We identified little existing evidence in support of the usage of telehealth within a One Health paradigm, although in isolation, both are useful for the same purpose, i.e., mitigation of the significant public health risks posed by zoonoses, food borne infections, and antimicrobial resistance. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to integrate telehealth within a One Health framework to develop effective inter-sectoral communication essential for the mitigation and addressing of zoonoses, food security, food borne infection containment and antimicrobial stewardship. More research is needed to substantiate and investigate this model of healthcare.
Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos , Salud Única , Telemedicina , Humanos , Zoonosis/prevención & control , Farmacorresistencia MicrobianaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this paper is to provide a consensus review on telehealth delivery prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic to develop a set of recommendations for designing telehealth services and tools that contribute to system resilience and equitable health. METHODS: The IMIA-Telehealth Working Group (WG) members conducted a two-step approach to understand the role of telehealth in enabling global health equity. We first conducted a consensus review on the topic followed by a modified Delphi process to respond to four questions related to the role telehealth can play in developing a resilient and equitable health system. RESULTS: Fifteen WG members from eight countries participated in the Delphi process to share their views. The experts agreed that while telehealth services before and during COVID-19 pandemic have enhanced the delivery of and access to healthcare services, they were also concerned that global telehealth delivery has not been equal for everyone. The group came to a consensus that health system concepts including technology, financing, access to medical supplies and equipment, and governance capacity can all impact the delivery of telehealth services. CONCLUSION: Telehealth played a significant role in delivering healthcare services during the pandemic. However, telehealth delivery has also led to unintended consequences (UICs) including inequity issues and an increase in the digital divide. Telehealth practitioners, professionals and system designers therefore need to purposely design for equity as part of achieving broader health system goals.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Equidad en Salud , Telemedicina , Humanos , PandemiasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Telehealth implementation is a complex systems-based endeavour. This paper compares telehealth responses to (COrona VIrus Disease 2019) COVID-19 across ten countries to identify lessons learned about the complexity of telehealth during critical response such as in response to a global pandemic. Our overall objective is to develop a health systems-based framework for telehealth implementation to support critical response. METHODS: We sought responses from the members of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) Telehealth Working Group (WG) on their practices and perception of telehealth practices during the times of COVID-19 pandemic in their respective countries. We then analysed their responses to identify six emerging themes that we mapped to the World Health Organization (WHO) model of health systems. RESULTS: Our analysis identified six emergent themes. (1) Government, legal or regulatory aspects of telehealth; (2) Increase in telehealth capacity and delivery; (3) Regulated and unregulated telehealth; (4) Changes in the uptake and perception of telemedicine; (5) Public engagement in telehealth responses to COVID-19; and (6) Implications for training and education. We discuss these themes and then use them to develop a systems framework for telehealth support in critical response. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has introduced new challenges for telehealth support in times of critical response. Our themes and systems framework extend the WHO systems model and highlight that telemedicine usage in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is complex and multidimensional. Our systems-based framework provides guidance for telehealth implementation as part of health systems response to a global pandemic such as COVID-19.