Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ehealth interventions in somatic diseases: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: eHealth potentially enhances quality of care and may reduce health care costs. However, a review of systematic reviews published in 2010 concluded that high-quality evidence on the benefits of eHealth interventions was still lacking. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effectiveness/cost-effectiveness of eHealth interventions in patients with somatic diseases to analyze whether, and to what possible extent, the outcome of recent research supports or differs from previous conclusions. METHODS: Literature searches were performed in PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on eHealth interventions published between August 2009 and December 2012. Articles were screened for relevance based on preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. Citations of residual articles were screened for additional literature. Included papers were critically appraised using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement before data were extracted. Based on conclusions drawn by the authors of the included articles, reviews and meta-analyses were divided into 1 of 3 groups: suitable, promising, or limited evidence on effectiveness/cost-effectiveness. Cases of uncertainty were resolved by consensus discussion. Effect sizes were extracted from papers that included a meta-analysis. To compare our results with previous findings, a trend analysis was performed. RESULTS: Our literature searches yielded 31 eligible reviews, of which 20 (65%) reported on costs. Seven papers (23%) concluded that eHealth is effective/cost-effective, 13 (42%) underlined that evidence is promising, and others found limited or inconsistent proof. Methodological quality of the included reviews and meta-analyses was generally considered high. Trend analysis showed a considerable accumulation of literature on eHealth. However, a similar percentage of papers concluded that eHealth is effective/cost-effective or evidence is at least promising (65% vs 62%). Reviews focusing primarily on children or family caregivers still remained scarce. Although a pooled (subgroup) analysis of aggregate data from randomized studies was performed in a higher percentage of more recently published reviews (45% vs 27%), data on economic outcome measures were less frequently reported (65% vs 85%). CONCLUSIONS: The number of reviews and meta-analyses on eHealth interventions in patients with somatic diseases has increased considerably in recent years. Most articles show eHealth is effective/cost-effective or at least suggest evidence is promising, which is consistent with previous findings. Although many researchers advocate larger, well-designed, controlled studies, we believe attention should be given to the development and evaluation of strategies to implement effective/cost-effective eHealth initiatives in daily practice, rather than to further strengthen current evidence.

Making a web based ulcer record work by aligning architecture, legislation and users - a formative evaluation study.

The University Hospital of North Norway selected a web-based ulcer record used in Denmark, available from mobile phones. Data was stored in a common database and easily accessible. According to Norwegian legislation, only employees of the organization that owns an IT system can access the system, and use of mobile units requires strong security solutions. The system had to be changed. The paper addresses interactions in order to make the system legal, and assesses regulations that followed. By addressing conflicting scripts and the contingent nature of knowledge, we conducted a formative evaluation aiming at improving the object being studied. Participatory observation in a one year process, minutes from meetings and information from participants, constitute the data material. In the technological domain, one database was replaced by four. In the health care delivery domain, easy access was replaced by a more complicated log on procedure, and in the domain of law and security, a clarification of risk levels was obtained, thereby allowing for access by mobile phones with today's authentication mechanisms. Flexibility concerning predefined scripts was important in all domains. Changes were made that improved the platform for further development of legitimate communication of patient data via mobile units. The study also shows the value of formative evaluations in innovations.

The Significance of Emotions and Professional Relations for Accommodating a Web-Based Ulcer Record and Improving Home-Based Care.

Evidence of technological performance, medical improvements and economic effectiveness is generally considered sufficient for judging advances in healthcare. In this paper, I aim to add knowledge about the ways human emotions and professional relations play roles in the processes of accommodating new technologies for quality improvements. A newly-implemented, web-based ulcer record service for patients with chronic skin ulcers constitutes the case. After one year, only a few home care nurses were using the service, interacting with a specialist team. The result was disappointing, but the few users were enthusiastic. An explorative, qualitative study was initiated to understand the users, the processes that accounted for use and how improvements were enacted. In the paper, I expose the emotional aspects of the record accommodation by analyzing the ways emotions were translated in the process and how they influenced the improvements. I contend that use came about through a heterogeneous assemblage of ethical engagement and compassionate emotions stemming from frustration, combined with technological affordances and relations between different professionals. Certain aspects of the improvements are exposed. These are discussed as: (1) reconciliations between the medical facts and rational judgments, on one side, and the emotional and subjective values for judging quality, on the other; and (2) mediation between standardized and personalized care. The healing of ulcers was combined with a sense of purpose and wellbeing to validate improvements. Emotions were strongly involved, and the power of evaluative emotions and professional relations should be further explored to add to the understanding of innovation processes and to validate quality improvements.

Methodologies for assessing telemedicine: a systematic review of reviews.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous reviews have expressed concerns about the quality of telemedicine studies. There is debate about shortcomings and appropriate methodologies. The aim of this review of systematic reviews of telemedicine is to summarize methodologies used in telemedicine research, discuss knowledge gaps and recommendations and suggest methodological approaches for further research. METHODS: We conducted a review of systematic reviews of telemedicine according to a protocol listing explicit methods, selection criteria, data collection and quality assessment procedures. We included reviews where authors explicitly addressed and made recommendations for assessment methodologies. We did a qualitative analysis of the reviews included, sensitized by two broad methodological positions; positivist and naturalistic approaches. The analysis focused on methodologies used in the primary studies included in the reviews as reported by the review authors, and methodological recommendations made by the review authors. RESULTS: We identified 1593 titles/abstracts. We included 50 reviews that explicitly addressed assessment methodologies. One group of reviews recommended larger and more rigorously designed controlled studies to assess the impacts of telemedicine; a second group proposed standardisation of populations, and/or interventions and outcome measures to reduce heterogeneity and facilitate meta-analysis; a third group recommended combining quantitative and qualitative research methods; and others applying different naturalistic approaches including methodologies addressing mutual adaptations of services and users; politically driven action research and formative research aimed at collaboration to ensure capacity for improvement of services in natural settings. CONCLUSIONS: Larger and more rigorous studies are crucial for the production of evidence of effectiveness of unambiguous telemedicine services for pre defined outcome measures. Summative methodologies acknowledging telemedicine as complex innovations and outcomes as partly contingent on values, meanings and contexts are also important. So are formative, naturalistic methodologies that acknowledge telemedicine as ongoing collaborative achievements and engage with stakeholders, including patients to produce and conceptualise new and effective telemedicine innovations.

Effectiveness of telemedicine: a systematic review of reviews.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a review of reviews on the impacts and costs of telemedicine services. METHODS: A review of systematic reviews of telemedicine interventions was conducted. Interventions included all e-health interventions, information and communication technologies for communication in health care, Internet based interventions for diagnosis and treatments, and social care if important part of health care and in collaboration with health care for patients with chronic conditions were considered relevant. Each potentially relevant systematic review was assessed in full text by one member of an external expert team, using a revised check list from EPOC (Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group) to assess quality. Qualitative analysis of the included reviews was informed by principles of realist review. RESULTS: In total 1593 titles/abstracts were identified. Following quality assessment, the review included 80 heterogeneous systematic reviews. Twenty-one reviews concluded that telemedicine is effective, 18 found that evidence is promising but incomplete and others that evidence is limited and inconsistent. Emerging themes are the particularly problematic nature of economic analyses of telemedicine, the benefits of telemedicine for patients, and telemedicine as complex and ongoing collaborative achievements in unpredictable processes. CONCLUSIONS: The emergence of new topic areas in this dynamic field is notable and reviewers are starting to explore new questions beyond those of clinical and cost-effectiveness. Reviewers point to a continuing need for larger studies of telemedicine as controlled interventions, and more focus on patients' perspectives, economic analyses and on telemedicine innovations as complex processes and ongoing collaborative achievements. Formative assessments are emerging as an area of interest.