[Patient safety in the Innovation Fund - Characterization, results and evaluation of completed projects: Results of a scoping review]. / Patientensicherheit im Innovationsfonds ­ Charakterisierung, Resultate und Bewertung abgeschlossener Projekte: Ergebnisse eines Scoping Reviews.

The German Innovation Fund has funded various studies on patient safety. Their thematic spectrum, methodological quality, results and recommendations of the Innovation committee were to be systematically investigated in order to derive proposals for optimizing transfer success. As part of a scoping review, all Innovation Fund projects funded in the period 2016-02/2023 with a focus on patient safety were analyzed. Each included study document was critically reviewed by two independent persons. The 16 included projects addressed a wide range of populations, indications and interventions. The study quality was mostly good. The results ranged from feasible indicator sets and the prevention of adverse drug reactions to the optimization of error management. For seven projects, the Innovation Committee recommended forwarding the results to healthcare institutions with the request that they take note and/or examine the feasibility of implementation in standard care. Implementation, however, has not yet taken place. In order to facilitate implementation, the joint development of an implementation strategy by the recipients of the Innovation Committee's recommendations is necessary.

Navigating the Future of Organisational Health Services Research in Germany and beyond: a Position Paper. / Die Zukunft der organisationsbezogenen Versorgungsforschung in Deutschland und darüber hinaus ­ ein Positionspapier.

BACKGROUND: Recent analyses have shown that in health services research in Germany, healthcare organisations are often considered primarily as a study setting, without fully taking their complex organisational nature into account, neither theoretically nor methodologically. Therefore, an initiative was launched to analyse the state of Organisational Health Services Research (OHSR) in Germany and to develop a strategic framework and road map to guide future efforts in the field. This paper summarizes positions that have been jointly developed by consulting experts from the interdisciplinary and international scientific community. METHODS: In July 2023, a scoping workshop over the course of three days was held with 32 (inter)national experts from different research fields centred around OHSR topics using interactive workshop methods. Participants discussed their perspectives on OHSR, analysed current challenges in OHSR in Germany and developed key positions for the field's development. RESULTS: The seven agreed-upon key positions addressed conceptual and strategic aspects. There was consensus that the field required the development of a research agenda that can guide future efforts. On a conceptual level, the need to address challenges in terms of interdisciplinarity, terminology, organisation(s) as research subjects, international comparative research and utilisation of organisational theory was recognized. On a strategic level, requirements with regard to teaching, promotion of interdisciplinary and international collaboration, suitable funding opportunities and participatory research were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This position paper seeks to serve as a framework to support further development of OHSR in Germany and as a guide for researchers and funding organisations on how to move OHSR forward. Some of the challenges discussed for German OHSR are equally present in other countries. Thus, this position paper can be used to initiate fruitful discussions in other countries.

Pandemic Preparedness - A Proposal for a Research Infrastructure and its Functionalities for a Resilient Health Research System. / Pandemic Preparedness ­ Ein Vorschlag für eine Forschungsinfrastruktur und ihre Funktionalitäten für ein resilientes Gesundheitsforschungssystem.

Während einer Pandemie muss Resilienz nicht nur als Eigenschaft des Gesundheitssystems, sondern auch des umgebenden Forschungsumfelds betrachtet werden. Um verlässliche, evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen aus der Universitätsmedizin an die Gesundheitspolitik und die Entscheidungsträger bereitstellen zu können, müssen wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse schnell, integrativ und multidisziplinär generiert, synthetisiert und kommuniziert werden. Die Resilienz der öffentlichen Gesundheitssysteme und der Gesundheitsforschungssysteme sind somit eng verknüpft. Die Reaktion auf die SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie in Deutschland wurde jedoch durch das Fehlen einer adäquat vernetzten Gesundheitsforschungsinfrastruktur erschwert. Das Netzwerk Universitätsmedizin (NUM) wurde zu Beginn der Pandemie mit dem Ziel gegründet, Deutschland auf zukünftige Pandemien vorzubereiten. Ziel des Projektes "PREparedness and PAndemic REsponse in Deutschland (PREPARED)" ist es, ein ganzheitliches Konzept für eine kooperative, adaptierbare und nachhaltige Gesundheitsforschungsinfrastruktur innerhalb des NUM zu entwickeln und damit einen Beitrag zu einer umfassenden Pandemiebereitschaft zu leisten. Das vorgeschlagene Konzept dieser Infrastruktur vereint vier Kern- und drei Unterstützungsfunktionalitäten in vier verschiedenen Handlungsfeldern. Die Funktionalitäten gewährleisten im Falle zukünftiger Gesundheitskrisen ein effizientes Funktionieren des Gesundheitsforschungssystems und eine rasche Übertragung entsprechender Implikationen in andere Systeme. Die vier Handlungsfelder sind (a) Monitoring und Surveillance, (b) Synthese und Transfer, (c) Koordination und Organisation sowie (d) Kapazitäten und Ressourcen. Die sieben Funktionalitäten umfassen 1) eine Monitoring- und Surveillance-Einheit, 2) eine Pathogenkompetenz-Plattform, 3) Evidenzsynthese und vertrauenswürdige Empfehlungen, 4) eine Einheit zur regionalen Vernetzung und Implementierung, 5) eine Strategische Kommunikationseinheit, 6) Human Resources Management und 7) ein Rapid Reaction & Response (R3)-Cockpit. Die Governance wird als Kontroll- und Regulierungssystem eingerichtet, wobei agile Management-Methoden in interpandemischen Phasen trainiert werden, um die Reaktionsfähigkeit zu verbessern sowie die Eignung agiler Methoden für die wissenschaftliche Infrastruktur für die Pandemiebereitschaft zu untersuchen. Der Aufbau der PREPARED-Forschungsinfrastruktur muss vor der nächsten Pandemie erfolgen, da Training und regelmäßige Stresstests grundlegende Voraussetzungen für deren Funktionieren sind.During a pandemic, resilience must be considered not only as an attribute of the health care system, but also of the surrounding research environment. To provide reliable evidence-based advice from university medicine to health policy and decision makers, scientific evidence must be generated, synthesized and communicated in a rapid, integrative and multidisciplinary manner. The resilience of public health systems and the health research systems are thus closely linked. However, the response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Germany was hampered by the lack of an adequate health research infrastructure. The Network University Medicine (NUM) was founded at the beginning of the pandemic with the aim of preparing Germany for future pandemics. The aim of the project "PREparedness and PAndemic REsponse in Deutschland (PREPARED)" is to develop a holistic concept for a cooperative, adaptable and sustainable health research infrastructure within the NUM and thus contribute to pandemic preparedness and rapid response. The proposed concept for a health research infrastructure includes four core and three supporting functionalities in four different fields of action. The functionalities aim to ensure efficient functioning within the health research system and a rapid translation to other systems in future health crises. The four fields of action are (a) monitoring and surveillance, (b) synthesis and transfer, (c) coordination and organization, and (d) capacities and resources. The seven functionalities include 1) a monitoring and surveillance unit, 2) a pathogen competence platform, 3) evidence synthesis and trustworthy recommendations, 4) a regional networking and implementation unit, 5) a strategic communication unit, 6) human resources management, and 7) a rapid reaction and the response (R3)-cockpit. A governance will be established as a control and regulatory system for all structures and processes, testing agile management in non-pandemic times to improve responsiveness and flexibility and to investigate the suitability of the methods for scientific pandemic preparedness. The establishment of the PREPARED health research infrastructure must take place before the next pandemic, as training and regular stress tests are its fundamental prerequisites.

Acceptance of a digital therapy recommender system for psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: About 2% of the German population are affected by psoriasis. A growing number of cost-intensive systemic treatments are available. Surveys have shown high proportions of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis are not adequately treated despite a high disease burden. Digital therapy recommendation systems (TRS) may help implement guideline-based treatment. However, little is known about the acceptance of such clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). Therefore, the aim of the study was to access the acceptance of a prototypical TRS demonstrator. METHODS: Three scenarios (potential test patients with psoriasis but different sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, previous treatments, desire to have children, and multiple comorbidities) were designed in the demonstrator. The TRS demonstrator and test patients were presented to a random sample of 76 dermatologists attending a national dermatology conference in a cross-sectional face-to-face survey with case vignettes. The dermatologist were asked to rate the demonstrator by system usability scale (SUS), whether they would use it for certain patients populations and barriers of usage. Reasons for potential usage of the TRS demonstrator were tested via a Poisson regression with robust standard errors. RESULTS: Acceptance of the TRS was highest for patients eligible for systemic therapy (82%). 50% of participants accepted the system for patients with additional comorbidities and 43% for patients with special subtypes of psoriasis. Dermatologists in the outpatient sector or with many patients per week were less willing to use the TRS for patients with special psoriasis-subtypes. Dermatologists rated the demonstrator as acceptable with an mean SUS of 76.8. Participants whose SUS was 10 points above average were 27% more likely to use TRS for special psoriasis-subtypes. The main barrier in using the TRS was time demand (47.4%). Participants who perceived time as an obstacle were 22.3% less willing to use TRS with systemic therapy patients. 27.6% of physicians stated that they did not understand exactly how the recommendation was generated by the TRS, with no effect on the preparedness to use the system. CONCLUSION: The considerably high acceptance and the preparedness to use the psoriasis CDSS suggests that a TRS appears to be implementable in routine healthcare and may improve clinical care. Main barrier is the additional time demand posed on dermatologists in a busy clinical setting. Therefore, it will be a major challenge to identify a limited set of variables that still allows a valid recommendation with precise prediction of the patient-individual benefits and harms.

[Development, Evaluation and Implementation of Digital Health Interventions (Part 1) - Discussion Paper of the Digital Health Working Group of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF)]. / Digitale Gesundheitsinterventionen entwickeln, evaluieren und implementieren (Teil I) ­ Diskussionspapier der Arbeitsgruppe Digital Health des Deutschen Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung (DNVF).

The development and application of digital interventions in health-related topics are gaining momentum in health service research. Digital interventions are often complex and need to be evaluated and implemented in complex settings. Due to their characteristics, this poses methodological challenges for health services research that have to be identified and addressed. Hence, the Working Group on Digital Health of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF) has prepared a discussion paper. This paper discusses methodological, practical and theoretical challenges associated with the development and evaluation of digital interventions from the perspective of health services research. Possible solutions are suggested and future research needs to address these methodological challenges are identified.

[Developing, Evaluating and Implementing Digital Health Interventions Part II - Discussion Paper of the Digital Health Working Group of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF)]. / Digitale Gesundheitsinterventionen entwickeln, evaluieren und implementieren Teil II ­ Diskussionspapier der Arbeitsgruppe Digital Health des Deutschen Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung (DNVF).

The methodological challenges of evaluating digital interventions (DI) for health services research are omnipresent. The Digital Health Working Group of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF) presented and discussed these challenges in a two-part discussion paper. The first part addressed challenges in definition, development and evaluation of DI. In this paper, which represents the second part, the definition of outcomes, reporting of results, synthesis of evidence, and implementation are addressed as methodological challenges of DI. Potential solutions are presented and the need to address these challenges in future research are discussed.

[Mixed Methods Studies in Health Services Research: Requirements, Challenges and the Question of Integration - a Discussion Paper from the Perspective of Qualitative Researchers]. / Mixed Methods-Studien in der Versorgungsforschung: Anforderungen, Herausforderungen und die Frage der Integration ­ ein Diskussionspapier aus der Perspektive qualitativ Forschender.

With this discussion paper, the subgroup Mixed Methods of the working group Qualitative Research Methods in the non-profit organization German Network Health Services Research (DNVF) is taking up the topic of three previous discussion papers on the significance and potentials of qualitative research methods in health services research. Mixed methods are being increasingly used and demanded in health services research. However, there are also areas of conflict in the planning and implementation of mixed methods studies, and these are addressed in this paper from the perspective of qualitative research. Special attention is given to the aspect of integration as the fundamental signature of mixed methods research. With this discussion paper, our aim was to stimulate critical as well as constructive exchange of ideas on what constitutes high-quality health services research characterised by a diversity of methods and the framework conditions under which this can succeed.

[Measures and Recommendations for Ensuring Adequate Inpatient Care Capacities for Pandemic Management within a Region: Results of a Hybrid Delphi Method]. / Maßnahmen und Empfehlungen für die Sicherstellung adäquater stationärer Versorgungskapazitäten für das Pandemiemanagement innerhalb einer Region ­ Ergebnisse eines hybriden Delphi-Verfahrens.

INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the pandemic in spring 2020, inpatient healthcare has been under enormous burden, which is reflected especially in overworked staff, imprecise bed planning and/or data transfer. According to the recommendation of the Science Council, university clinics should play a controlling role in regional healthcare and act in conjunction with surrounding hospitals and practices. METHODS: In September 2021, 31 representatives from 18 university hospitals were invited to a hybrid Delphi study with a total of 4 survey rounds to discuss criteria for effective inpatient care in a pandemic situation, which were extracted from previous expert interviews. Criteria that were classified as very important/relevant by≥75% of the participants in the first round of the survey (consensus definition) were then further summarized in 4 different small groups. In a third Delphi round, all participants came together again to discuss the results of the small group discussions. Subsequently, these were prioritized as Optional ("can"), Desirable ("should") or Necessary ("must") recommendations. RESULTS: Of the invited clinical experts, 21 (67.7%) participated in at least one Delphi round. In an online survey (1st Delphi round), 233 criteria were agreed upon and reduced to 84 criteria for future pandemic management in four thematic small group discussions (2nd Delphi round) and divided into the small groups as follows: "Crisis Management and Crisis Plans" (n=20), "Human Resources Management and Internal Communication" (n=16), "Regional Integration and External Communication" (n=24) and "Capacity Management and Case & Care" (n=24). In the following group discussion (3rd Delphi round), the criteria were further modified and agreed upon by the experts, so that in the end result, there were 23 essential requirements and recommendations for effective inpatient care in a pandemic situation. CONCLUSION: The results draw attention to key demands of clinical representatives, for example, comprehensive digitization, standardization of processes and better (supra) regional networking in order to be able to guarantee needs-based care even under pandemic conditions. The present consensus recommendations can serve as guidelines for future pandemic management in the inpatient care sector.

Implementing longitudinal integrated curricula: Systematic review of barriers and facilitators.

PURPOSE: The increase of longitudinal integrated curricula in medical schools worldwide represents the shift towards an outcome-oriented education. This novel model allows comprehensive student-patient interactions over time and integrates the educational content across disciplines. According to quantitative research, students, patients, doctors and communities benefit from this educational model in terms of participant satisfaction, learning outcomes and clinician recruitment. However, quantitative research does not provide detailed information on programme implementation processes. Therefore, this review aims to summarise facilitators and barriers of programme implementation reported in qualitative and mixed methods studies. METHOD: The authors reviewed the literature about facilitators and barriers for the implementation of longitudinal integrated curricula in undergraduate medical education programmes. The systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 2 December 2019. The authors used the CASP checklist for qualitative research for the critical appraisal and summarised the results across studies using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: The authors screened 1682 reports. Twenty studies examining 17 different curricula met the inclusion criteria. Most curricula were implemented in the United States (n = 6/17), Australia (n = 5/17) or Canada (n = 4/17). Programme implementation is facilitated and hampered by its educational components (eg continuity of supervision, safe learning environments), organisational structures (eg community involvement) and participating students' and staff' motivation and personality. The critical appraisal revealed that several studies lacked transparent documentation and adequate reflection on the researcher-participant relationship (n = 20/20), data collection instruments (n = 12/20) and recruitment strategy (n = 4/20). CONCLUSIONS: The authors derived practical recommendations for the implementation of undergraduate, patient-centred, integrated medical curricula. Programme managers need to define and communicate common objectives with all participants. They should clarify the implementation of the objectives in all processes in a transparent and structured manner. Considering reporting guidelines, future studies in this field should document more transparently the methods used to gain qualitative insights and the researchers' personal involvement.

Evaluation of a flexible and integrative psychiatric care model in a department of child and adolescent psychiatry in Tübingen, Germany: study protocol (EVA_TIBAS).

BACKGROUND: Model projects for flexible and integrated treatment (FIT) in Germany aim at advancing the quality of care for people with mental disorders. A new FIT model project was established in 2017 at the Department of child and adolescent psychiatry (KJP) of the University Hospital Tübingen (Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, UKT). The study design of EVA_TIBAS presented here describes the evaluation of the FIT model project at the KJP of the UKT. This evaluation aims at quantifying the anticipated FIT model project changes, which are to improve patients' cross-sectoral care at the same maximum cost as standard care. METHODS: EVA_TIBAS is a controlled cohort study using a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods. The FIT evaluation consists of three modules. In Module A, anonymized claims data of a statutory health insurance fund will be used to compare outcomes (duration of inpatient and day care psychiatric treatment, inpatient and day care psychiatric length of stay, outpatient psychiatric treatment in hospital, inpatient hospital readmission, emergency admission rate, direct medical costs) of patients treated in the model hospital with patients treated in structurally comparable control hospitals (estimated sample size = ca. 600 patients). In Module B, patient-reported outcomes (health related quality of life, symptom burden, return to psychosocial relationships (e.g. school, friends, hobbies), treatment satisfaction, societal costs) will be assessed quantitatively using validated questionnaires for the model and two control hospitals (estimated sample size = ca. 300 patients). A subsequent health economic evaluation will be based on cost-effectiveness analyses from both the insurance fund's and the societal perspective. In Module C, about 30 semi-structured interviews will examine the quality of offer, effects and benefits of the service offered by the social service of the AOK Baden-Württemberg (for stabilizing the overall situation of care in the family) in the model hospital. A focus group discussion will address the quality of cooperation between employees of the university hospital and the social services. DISCUSSION: The results of this evaluation will be used to inform policy makers whether this FIT model project or aspects of it should be implemented into standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov PRS (ID: NCT04727359 , date: 27 January 2021).

Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Patient-Reported Experience Measures Within Evaluation Studies of Telemedicine Applications: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: With the rise of digital health technologies and telemedicine, the need for evidence-based evaluation is growing. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are recommended as an essential part of the evaluation of telemedicine. For the first time, a systematic review has been conducted to investigate the use of PROMs and PREMs in the evaluation studies of telemedicine covering all application types and medical purposes. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the following research questions: in which scenarios are PROMs and PREMs collected for evaluation purposes, which PROM and PREM outcome domains have been covered and how often, which outcome measurement instruments have been used and how often, does the selection and quantity of PROMs and PREMs differ between study types and application types, and has the use of PROMs and PREMs changed over time. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases and included studies published from inception until April 2, 2020. We included studies evaluating telemedicine with patients as the main users; these studies reported PROMs and PREMs within randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, noncontrolled trials, and feasibility trials in English and German. RESULTS: Of the identified 2671 studies, 303 (11.34%) were included; of the 303 studies, 67 (22.1%) were feasibility studies, 70 (23.1%) were noncontrolled trials, 20 (6.6%) were controlled trials, and 146 (48.2%) were randomized controlled trials. Health-related quality of life (n=310; mean 1.02, SD 1.05), emotional function (n=244; mean 0.81, SD 1.18), and adherence (n=103; mean 0.34, SD 0.53) were the most frequently assessed outcome domains. Self-developed PROMs were used in 21.4% (65/303) of the studies, and self-developed PREMs were used in 22.3% (68/303). PROMs (n=884) were assessed more frequently than PREMs (n=234). As the evidence level of the studies increased, the number of PROMs also increased (τ=-0.45), and the number of PREMs decreased (τ=0.35). Since 2000, not only has the number of studies using PROMs and PREMs increased, but the level of evidence and the number of outcome measurement instruments used have also increased, with the number of PREMs permanently remaining at a lower level. CONCLUSIONS: There have been increasingly more studies, particularly high-evidence studies, which use PROMs and PREMs to evaluate telemedicine. PROMs have been used more frequently than PREMs. With the increasing maturity stage of telemedicine applications and higher evidence level, the use of PROMs increased in line with the recommendations of evaluation guidelines. Health-related quality of life and emotional function were measured in almost all the studies. Simultaneously, health literacy as a precondition for using the application adequately, alongside proper training and guidance, has rarely been reported. Further efforts should be pursued to standardize PROM and PREM collection in evaluation studies of telemedicine.

Mapping the Evidence on the Effectiveness of Telemedicine Interventions in Diabetes, Dyslipidemia, and Hypertension: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is defined by three characteristics: (1) using information and communication technologies, (2) covering a geographical distance, and (3) involving professionals who deliver care directly to a patient or a group of patients. It is said to improve chronic care management and self-management in patients with chronic diseases. However, currently available guidelines for the care of patients with diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia do not include evidence-based guidance on which components of telemedicine are most effective for which patient populations. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to identify, synthesize, and critically appraise evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine solutions and their components on clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review of high-level evidence, including systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. On the basis of predefined eligibility criteria, extensive automated and manual searches of the databases PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were conducted. Two authors independently screened the studies, extracted data, and carried out the quality assessments. Extracted data were presented according to intervention components and patient characteristics using defined thresholds of clinical relevance. Overall certainty of outcomes was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: Overall, 3564 references were identified, of which 46 records were included after applying eligibility criteria. The majority of included studies were published after 2015. Significant and clinically relevant reduction rates for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; ≤-0.5%) were found in patients with diabetes. Higher reduction rates were found for recently diagnosed patients and those with higher baseline HbA1c (>8%). Telemedicine was not found to have a significant and clinically meaningful impact on blood pressure. Only reviews or meta-analyses reporting lipid outcomes in patients with diabetes were found. GRADE assessment revealed that the overall quality of the evidence was low to very low. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this umbrella review indicate that telemedicine has the potential to improve clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes. Although subgroup-specific effectiveness rates favoring certain intervention and population characteristics were found, the low GRADE ratings indicate that evidence can be considered as limited. Future updates of clinical care and practice guidelines should carefully assess the methodological quality of studies and the overall certainty of subgroup-specific outcomes before recommending telemedicine interventions for certain patient populations.

What should governments be doing to prevent diabetes throughout the life course?

Health systems and governments are increasingly required to implement measures that target at-risk populations to prevent noncommunicable diseases. In this review we lay out what governments should be doing to prevent diabetes throughout the life course. The following four target groups were used to structure the specific recommendations: (1) pregnant women and young families, (2) children and adolescents, (3) working age population, and (4) the elderly. The evidence to date supports the effectiveness of some known government policy measures, such as sugar taxes and regulatory measures in the (pre-)school setting for children and adolescents. Many of these appear to be more effective if they are part of a bundle of strategies and if they are supplemented by communication strategies. Although there is a current focus on strategies that target the individual, governments can make use of evidence-based population-level prevention strategies. More research and continuous evaluation of the overall and subgroup-specific effectiveness of policy strategies using high-quality longitudinal studies are needed.

Theories Predicting End-User Acceptance of Telemedicine Use: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Only a few telemedicine applications have made their way into regular care. One reason is the lack of acceptance of telemedicine by potential end users. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify theoretical predictors that influence the acceptance of telemedicine. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted in PubMed and PsycINFO in June 2018 and supplemented by a hand search. Articles were identified using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. In total, two reviewers independently assessed the title, abstract, and full-text screening and then individually performed a quality assessment of all included studies. RESULTS: Out of 5917 potentially relevant titles (duplicates excluded), 24 studies were included. The Axis Tool for quality assessment of cross-sectional studies revealed a high risk of bias for all studies except for one study. The most commonly used models were the Technology Acceptance Model (n=11) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (n=9). The main significant predictors of acceptance were perceived usefulness (n=11), social influences (n=6), and attitude (n=6). The results show a superiority of technology acceptance versus original behavioral models. CONCLUSIONS: The main finding of this review is the applicability of technology acceptance models and theories on telemedicine adoption. Characteristics of the technology, such as its usefulness, as well as attributes of the individual, such as his or her need for social support, inform end-user acceptance. Therefore, in the future, requirements of the target group and the group's social environment should already be taken into account when planning telemedicine applications. The results support the importance of theory-guided user-centered design approaches to telemedicine development.

The telemedicine community readiness model-successful telemedicine implementation and scale-up.

To successfully scale-up telemedicine initiatives (TIs), communities play a crucial role. To empower communities fulfilling this role and increase end users' acceptance of TIs, support tools (from now on entitled artifacts) are needed that include specific measures to implement and scale up telemedicine. Addressing this need, the article introduces the Telemedicine Community Readiness Model (TCRM). The TCRM is designed to help decision-makers in communities to create a favorable environment that facilitates the implementation and scale-up of TIs. The TCRM is a practical tool to assess communities' readiness to implement TIs and identify aspects to improve this readiness. The development process follows a design-science procedure, which integrates literature reviews and semi-structured expert interviews to justify and evaluate design decisions and the final design. For researchers, the paper provides insights into factors that influence telemedicine implementation and scale-up (descriptive role of knowledge) on the community level. For practitioners, it provides a meaningful tool to support the implementation and scale-up of TIs (prescriptive role of knowledge). This should help to realize the potential of telemedicine solutions to increase access to healthcare services and their quality.

Effectiveness of Digital Health Interventions Containing Game Components for the Self-management of Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Games and game components have become a major trend in the realm of digital health research and practice as they are assumed to foster behavior change and thereby improve patient-reported and clinical outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of digital health interventions containing game components on behavioral, patient-reported, and clinical outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE and PsycINFO in April 2020; updated in April 2022; and supplemented by additional searches via Google Scholar, Web of Science (which was used for forward citation tracking), and within the references of the included records. Articles were identified using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. In total, 2 reviewers independently conducted title, abstract, and full-text screening and then individually performed a critical appraisal of all the included studies using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2. A consensus was reached through discussion. RESULTS: Of 2325 potentially relevant titles (duplicates excluded), 10 (0.43%) randomized controlled trials were included in this review. Quality assessment revealed a high risk of bias for all randomized controlled trials except for 10% (1/10), with performance bias due to the lack of blinding being the major source of bias. There is evidence suggesting that digital health interventions containing game components can substantially improve motivation for physical activity (1/1, 100% of the studies dealing with PA motivation), exercise intensity (3/5, 60%), dietary behavior (4/4, 100%), health literacy (1/3, 33%), mental quality of life (2/2, 100%), glycated hemoglobin level (2/6, 33%), BMI (1/3, 33%), fasting plasma glucose level (1/2, 50%), waist circumference (1/1, 100%), and aerobic capacity (1/1, 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Published studies indicated that digital health interventions containing game components might improve health behavior patterns, quality of life, and clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the intervention types and outcomes studied were heterogeneous, and study quality was mostly low, which translates to ambiguous results. Future research should focus on sound methodology and reporting as well as on identifying game components that contribute to significant positive effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020209706; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=209706.

Tackling the scaling-up problem of digital health applications.

AIM: The purpose of this editorial is to provide guidance for the readers concerning the broad realm of approaches towards successful implementation of digital health applications into the health care system. Recent developments due to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic are used as a current angle. SUBJECT AND METHODS: All contributions within the special issue were scanned for their most decisive contribution to the special issue and the field of implementation science, with a focus on digital health. Micro, meso, and macro layers of implementation processes, as well as the technological perspective itself, are used as broad categories for sorting the contributions and structuring the special issue. RESULTS: The ten contributions to this special issue cover micro (n = 1), technology (n = 1), meso (n = 4) and macro (n = 2) perspectives on the implementation process of digital health applications. Two further contributions also tackle the issue from a wider perspective when aiming to structure telemedicine application types and barriers encountered when implementing digital health. CONCLUSION: Considering the wide array of research fields represented in this special issue, an emphasis is put on the importance of interdisciplinary work required for tackling the scale-up problem of digital health. As such, the special issue can assist in leveraging the full potential of digital health, not only when dealing with situations as out-of-the-ordinary as the current pandemic but also well beyond that, for example when dealing with the upcoming challenges of demographic change.