An insight into the use of telemedicine technology for cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The use of telemedicine technology has significantly increased in recent years, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. This study aimed to investigate the use of telemedicine technology for cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a scoping review conducted in 2023. Various databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Ovid, IEEE Xplore, ProQuest, Embase, and Google Scholar search engine were searched. All quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies published in English between 2020 and 2022 were included. Finally, the needed data were extracted, and the results were synthesized and reported narratively. RESULTS: A total of 29 articles were included in this review. The results showed that teleconsultation, televisit, and telerehabilitation were common telemedicine services, and video conferencing and telephone were common technologies used in these studies. In most cases, patients and healthcare providers preferred these services compared to the face-to-face consultations due to their convenience and advantages. Furthermore, the findings revealed that in terms of clinical outcomes, telemedicine could effectively reduce anxiety, pain, sleep disorders, and hospital admission rates. CONCLUSION: The findings provided valuable insights into the various telemedicine technologies, services, users' perspectives, and clinical outcomes in cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. Overall, the positive outcomes and users' satisfaction showed that the use of telemedicine technology can be expanded, particularly in cancer care. Future research needs to investigate both clinical and non-clinical effectiveness of using various telemedicine services and technologies for improving cancer care delivery, which can help to develop more successful strategies for implementing this technology.

Patient empowerment through a user-centered design of an electronic personal health record: a qualitative study of user requirements in chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: To improve chronic disease outcomes, self-management is an effective strategy. An electronic personal health record (ePHR) is a promising tool with the potential to support chronic patient's education, counseling, and self-management. Fitting ePHRs within the daily practices of chronic care providers and chronic patients requires user-centered design approaches. We aimed to understand users' needs and requirements in chronic kidney disease (CKD) care to consider in the design of an ePHR to facilitate its implementation, adoption, and use. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted in a major Iranian nephrology center including inpatient and outpatient settings in 2019. We conducted 28 semi-structured interviews with CKD patients, nurses, and adult nephrologists. To confirm or modify the requirements extracted from the interviews, a focus group was also held. Data were analyzed to extract especially those requirements that can facilitate implementation, adoption, and sustained use based on the PHR adoption model and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. RESULTS: Participants requested an ePHR that provides access to up to date patient information, facilitates patient-provider communication, and increases awareness about patient individualized conditions. Participants expected a system that is able to cater to low patient e-health literacy and high provider workload. They requested the ePHR to include purposeful documentation of medical history, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, tailored educational content, and scheduled care reminders. Messaging function, tailored educational content to individual patients' conditions, and controlled access to information were highly valued in order to facilitate its implementation, adoption, and use. CONCLUSIONS: We focused on the ePHR's content and functionalities in the face of facilitators and/or barriers envisioned for its adoption in nephrology care. Designers and implementers should value CKD patients' needs and requirements for self-management such as providing personalized education and counseling (on the basis of their condition and risk factors), health literacy, and disease progression levels. The socio-technical aspects of care also need further attention to facilitate ePHR's adoption.

Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are defined as electronic applications through which individuals can access, manage, and share health information in a private, secure, and confidential environment. Existing evidence shows their benefits in improving outcomes, especially for chronic disease patients. However, their use has not been as widespread as expected partly due to barriers faced in their adoption and use. We aimed to identify the types of barriers to a patient, provider, and caregiver adoption/use of ePHRs and to analyze their extent in chronic disease care. METHODS: A systematic search in Medline, PubMed, Science Direct, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) database was performed to find original studies assessing barriers to ePHR adoption/use in chronic care until the end of 2018. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. We used the PHR adoption model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to analyze the results. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 was used to assess the quality of evidence in the included studies. RESULTS: Sixty publications met our inclusion criteria. Issues found hindering ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care were associated with demographic factors (e.g., patient age and gender) along with key variables related to health status, computer literacy, preferences for direct communication, and patient's strategy for coping with a chronic condition; as well as factors related to medical practice/environment (e.g., providers' lack of interest or resistance to adopting ePHRs due to workload, lack of reimbursement, and lack of user training); technological (e.g., concerns over privacy and security, interoperability with electronic health record systems, and lack of customized features for chronic conditions); and chronic disease characteristics (e.g., multiplicities of co-morbid conditions, settings, and providers involved in chronic care). CONCLUSIONS: ePHRs can be meaningfully used in chronic disease care if they are implemented as a component of comprehensive care models specifically developed for this care. Our results provide insight into hurdles and barriers mitigating ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care. A deeper understating of the interplay between these barriers will provide opportunities that can lead to an enhanced ePHR adoption/use.