RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Particularly in rural regions, factors such as lower physician density and long travel distances complicate adequate outpatient care. However, urban regions can also be affected by deficits in care, for example, long waiting times. One model of care intending to improve the situation is the implementation of video consultations. The study protocol presents the methodology of the research project titled "Preference-based implementation of the video consultation in urban and rural regions" funded by the German Federal Joint Committee (funding number 01VSF20011). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify existing barriers to the use of video consultation and the preferences of insured individuals and physicians as well as psychotherapists in order to optimize its design and thus increase acceptance and use of video consultations in urban and rural regions. METHODS: Built on a mixed methods approach, this study first assesses the status quo of video consultation use through claims data analysis and carries out a systematic literature review on barriers and promoting factors for the use of video consultations. Based on this preliminary work, focus groups are conducted in order to prepare surveys with insureds as well as physicians and psychotherapists in the second study phase. The central element of the survey is the implementation of discrete choice experiments to elicit relevant preferences of (potential) user groups and service providers. The summarized findings are discussed in a stakeholder workshop and translated into health policy recommendations. RESULTS: The methodological approach used in this study is the focus of this paper. The study is still ongoing and will continue until March 2024. The first study phase has already been completed, in which preliminary work has been done on potential applications and hurdles for the use of video consultations. Currently, the survey is being conducted and analyses are being prepared. CONCLUSIONS: This study is intended to develop a targeted strategy for health policy makers based on actual preferences and perceived obstacles to the use of video consultations. The results of this study will contribute to further user-oriented development of the implementation of video consultations in German statutory health insurance. Furthermore, the iterative and mixed methods approach used in this study protocol is also suitable for a variety of other research projects. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/50932.
RESUMO
Introduction: Health apps offer an approach to improve the patients' management of their medication. Although the Digital Healthcare Act (DVG) has created a claim in the statutory health insurance (SHI), the large number of health apps available and their varying quality make it difficult for service providers and especially for medical laypersons to select an adequate high-quality medication app. Manufacturers need guidance for the development of high-quality apps right from the start. Various general evaluation concepts for health apps have been available to date. However, the requirements that should be met by healthcare depend largely on the field of application and the type of apps. This article aims to provide an overview of the international evidence on specific criteria for the evaluation of medication apps. Methods: Within the framework of a scoping review, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE on January 29, 2020. The search was limited to publications from 2007 onwards as well as to English and German articles. Additionally, a semi-systematic research of reference lists of the previously included articles as well as a structured search of websites of relevant stakeholders were conducted. Inclusion criteria were the following: the publication deals with health apps that can be used on smartphones and focus on supporting medication intake; the publication does not refer to evaluation criteria for a single app exclusively. The included publications were examined in a qualitative content analysis searching for evaluation criteria and categorizing them according to the framework criteria of the DVG and the Digital Health Applications Ordinance (DiGAV). Results: 2,542 articles were identified in the systematic search (999 in PubMed, 1,543 in EMBASE, 560 duplicates). A total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. The semi-systematic research and the structured search identified one further study. A catalog of criteria was developed based on the included 17 studies. This catalog covers the general topics "patient orientation" (data protection and security, consumer protection, user friendliness) and "quality/core functions of medication apps" (reminder, self-monitoring, (drug) information, motivation to change behavior, drug/patient safety, robustness) as well as "interoperability/cooperation". Due to its specific importance for medication apps, the subcategory "motivation for behavioral change" stands out beneath the general topic "quality/core functions of medication apps". This category aims to evaluate the design of individual functions with regard to their potential to actually change the behavior of app users. Discussion: The criteria for the evaluation of health apps mentioned in the DiGAV intersected with the criteria identified in the literature research. However, the area of positive health care effects was hardly covered by the included studies. In the development of the criteria catalog, it was not possible to weight the identified criteria. Therefore, the catalog should be understood as a supporting checklist for service providers, manufacturers, and/or users. Conclusions: A large variety of possible evaluation criteria for medication apps could be shown. Future research should focus on the possibilities of weighting these diverse evaluation criteria, using not only clinical studies but also methods to identify preferences.