Patient and Public Willingness to Share Personal Health Data for Third-Party or Secondary Uses: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: International advances in information communication, eHealth, and other digital health technologies have led to significant expansions in the collection and analysis of personal health data. However, following a series of high-profile data sharing scandals and the emergence of COVID-19, critical exploration of public willingness to share personal health data remains limited, particularly for third-party or secondary uses. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to explore factors that affect public willingness to share personal health data for third-party or secondary uses. METHODS: A systematic search of 6 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and SocINDEX) was conducted with review findings analyzed using inductive-thematic analysis and synthesized using a narrative approach. RESULTS: Of the 13,949 papers identified, 135 were included. Factors most commonly identified as a barrier to data sharing from a public perspective included data privacy, security, and management concerns. Other factors found to influence willingness to share personal health data included the type of data being collected (ie, perceived sensitivity); the type of user requesting their data to be shared, including their perceived motivation, profit prioritization, and ability to directly impact patient care; trust in the data user, as well as in associated processes, often established through individual choice and control over what data are shared with whom, when, and for how long, supported by appropriate models of dynamic consent; the presence of a feedback loop; and clearly articulated benefits or issue relevance including valued incentivization and compensation at both an individual and collective or societal level. CONCLUSIONS: There is general, yet conditional public support for sharing personal health data for third-party or secondary use. Clarity, transparency, and individual control over who has access to what data, when, and for how long are widely regarded as essential prerequisites for public data sharing support. Individual levels of control and choice need to operate within the auspices of assured data privacy and security processes, underpinned by dynamic and responsive models of consent that prioritize individual or collective benefits over and above commercial gain. Failure to understand, design, and refine data sharing approaches in response to changeable patient preferences will only jeopardize the tangible benefits of data sharing practices being fully realized.

Walk a mile in my shoes: perspectives towards sharing of health and experience data among individuals living with sickle cell disorder.

Background: Advancements in digital health technologies (DHTs) mean people are increasingly recording and managing personal health data. As observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, sharing of such data may provide unrivalled opportunities in advancing our understanding of conditions otherwise poorly understood, including rare conditions. Methods: A semi-structured focus group (n=25) explored perspectives and experiences of sharing health data among those with a group of rare haematological conditions, sickle cell disorder (SCD). The focus group explored (I) what 'feeling well' looks like; (II) how this could be monitored using DHTs; (III) which data healthcare professionals (HCPs) should pay greater attention to and; (IV) types of data willing to be shared, with whom, and under which conditions. Key themes were further assessed via an online survey (n=50). Results: Patient-relevant measures of condition-management focused on "everything else that comes with" SCD, suggesting HCPs did not pay sufficient attention to day-to-day symptom variability. This was juxtaposed against the "fixed and one-off" electronic health record (EHR), collecting pre-specified data at pre-determined snapshots of time, not considered reflective of outcomes associated with "feeling well" day-to-day. Forty-four-point-seven percent of respondents had previously shared health data. Most were willing to share data concerning symptoms and health service utilisation, but were less willing to share genomic and EHR data. Sixty-one-point-seven percent believed HCPs did not pay enough attention to daily fluctuations in mental and physical health. Financial benefits (74.5%), trust in organisations seeking data (72.3%), and knowing how data will be used (61.7%) were key facilitators of data sharing. Seventy-one percent, 70% and 65.2% had not previously shared health data with the pharmaceutical industry, charitable organisations and digital health interventions respectively, but were open to doing so in the future. Conclusions: Those living with the rare condition SCD were supportive of collecting and sharing data to foster research and improve understanding and outcomes. However, specific requirements were identified to respect privacy and informational needs regarding future use of data. DHTs can be a valuable tool in improving understanding of the day-to-day impact of health conditions, but understanding patient needs is critical in ensuring involvement in the process, as not all data types are considered of equal value, benefit, or risk.

Staff perceptions towards virtual reality-motivated treadmill exercise for care home residents: a qualitative feedback study with key stakeholders and follow-up interview with technology developer.

OBJECTIVES: Health and care resources are under increasing pressure, partly due to the ageing population. Physical activity supports healthy ageing, but motivating exercise is challenging. We aimed to explore staff perceptions towards a virtual reality (VR) omnidirectional treadmill (MOTUS), aimed at increasing physical activity for older adult care home residents. DESIGN: Interactive workshops and qualitative evaluation. SETTINGS: Eight interactive workshops were held at six care homes and two university sites across Cornwall, England, from September to November 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-four staff participated, including care home, supported living, clinical care and compliance managers, carers, activity coordinators, occupational therapists and physiotherapists. INTERVENTIONS: Participants tried the VR treadmill system, followed by focus groups exploring device design, potential usefulness or barriers for care home residents. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. We subsequently conducted a follow-up interview with the technology developer (September 2022) to explore the feedback impact. RESULTS: The analysis produced seven key themes: anticipated benefits, acceptability, concerns of use, concerns of negative effects, suitability/unsuitability, improvements and current design. Participants were generally positive towards VR to motivate care home residents' physical activity and noted several potential benefits (increased exercise, stimulation, social interaction and rehabilitation). Despite the reported potential, staff had safety concerns for frail older residents due to their standing position. Participants suggested design improvements to enhance safety, usability and accessibility. Feedback to the designers resulted in the development of a new seated VR treadmill to address concerns about falls while maintaining motivation to exercise. The follow-up developer interview identified significant value in academia-industry collaboration. CONCLUSION: The use of VR-motivated exercise holds the potential to increase exercise, encourage reminiscence and promote meaningful activity for care home residents. Staff concerns resulted in a redesigned seated treadmill for those too frail to use the standing version. This novel study demonstrates the importance of stakeholder feedback in product design.

E-nursing homes: transforming access to nurses in nursing homes in response to the staffing crisis.

The UK is facing a nationwide staffing crisis within adult social care, due to difficulties in recruiting and retaining registered nurses. Current interpretation of legislation means nursing homes must always have the physical presence of a registered nurse on duty within the home. With the shortage of registered nurses increasing, reliance on agency workers is commonplace, a practice impacting service cost and continuity of care. Lack of innovation to tackle this issue means the question of how to transform service delivery to combat staffing shortages is open for debate. The potential for technology to augment the provision of care was highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article the authors present one possible solution focused on the provision of digital nursing care within nursing homes. Anticipated benefits include enhanced accessibility of nursing roles, reduced risk of viral spread and opportunities for upskilling staff. However, challenges include the current interpretation of legislation.

Loneliness and social networks of older adults in rural communities: a narrative synthesis systematic review.

Introduction: Loneliness has significant impacts on the health of older adults. Social networks help to improve psychosocial and quality of life outcomes among older adults. A fifth of older adults live in rural communities, where geographic isolation poses challenges to health. The dynamics of social networks of older adults in rural communities has not been explored. Objective: To synthesize the literature related to loneliness and social networks of older adults in rural settings. Methods: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted through searching six bibliographic databases to retrieve peer-reviewed literature with no time limits. We performed a methodological assessment of each study using a mixed method quality assessment tool. Findings are synthesized thematically. Results: A total of 50 studies (32 quantitative, 15 qualitative, and 3 mixed methods) were included in this review. Studies were conducted in 17 different countries, the majority from China (n = 12), the UK (n = 9), and USA (n = 9). Findings revealed that social networks of older adults consist of family, friends and neighbors and continue to be developed through participation in various physical and social activities such as walking groups and participation in religious events. Social networks offer informational, functional, psychological and social support to older adults. Through their social networks, older adults feel socially connected and cared for. Successful interventions to improve social networks and address loneliness were those developed in groups or one-on-one with the older adults. The key ingredient to the positive impact of these interventions on reducing social isolation and loneliness was the formation of a social connection and regular engagement with the older adults. However, the review did not find any explicitly reported theory or model on which these interventions are based. Conclusion: The prevalence of loneliness among older adults in rural areas needs urgent attention. Social network theory and methods can help in developing interventions to address social isolation and loneliness among older adults in rural communities.

Attitudes Toward Personal Health Data Sharing Among People Living With Sickle Cell Disorder, Exemplar for Study of Rare Disease Populations.

Purpose: Rare conditions are often poorly understood, creating barriers in determining the value treatments can provide. This study explored barriers and facilitators to personal health data sharing among those with one particular group of rare hematologic disorders, ie, sickle cell disorder (SCD) and its variants. Methods: A single online focus group among those >18 years of age and living with SCD was conducted. Participants (N=25) were recruited through a United Kingdom-based SCD charity. Discussions were transcribed verbatim, with data therein analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Five primary motivators for sharing health data were identified: improving awareness; knowing this would help others; evidencing impact; financial incentives; and being recognized as "experts with lived experience" rather than "specimens to be studied." Barriers included lack of clarity regarding "why" data was sought and "who" benefited. Participants stated that electronic health record (EHR) and genetic data were often "too detailed" and therefore "off limits" for sharing. However, experiences, mindset, and well-being data, often hidden from the EHR, were acceptable to share and considered a better barometer of how rare conditions treat patients day-to-day. Conclusions: Utilizing patient experience data obtained under real-world conditions is key to painting the most accurate picture of needs and understanding how SCD impacts patients' day-to-day lives. Study findings suggest that patients with SCD are not merely passive providers of health data, but rather experts by experience. To appreciate the value that patient perspectives bring, we must revisit this status quo, amending our approach to patient centricity and reframing patients as high-value managers of their condition and personal health data who crucially decide what, how, and when they share it.

Navigating Medical Device Certification: A Qualitative Exploration of Barriers and Enablers Amongst Innovators, Notified Bodies and Other Stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Medical device certification has undergone significant changes in recent years. However, exploration of stakeholder experiences remains relatively limited, particularly in the context of software as a medical device. This study sought to explore stakeholder experiences of medical device certification across both the UK and EU. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews (n = 22) analysed using inductive-thematic analysis, synthesised using activity theory. RESULTS: Innovators, consultants and notified bodies share more similarities than differences when discussing barriers and enablers to achieving medical device certification. Systemic tensions between existing rules, tools, community understanding and division of labour currently undermine the intended aim of certification processes. Existing rules are considered complex, with small and medium-sized enterprises considered disproportionality affected, resulting in several unintended outcomes including the perceived 'killing' of innovation. Existing certification processes are described as unfit for purpose, unethical and unsustainable. CONCLUSION: Stakeholder experiences suggest that the intention of establishing a robust and sustainable regulatory framework capable of ensuring a high level of safety whilst also supporting innovation is not yet being realised. Failure to enact desired changes may further jeopardise future innovations, outcomes and care quality.

Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The importance of meaningfully involving patients and the public in digital health innovation is widely acknowledged, but often poorly understood. This review, therefore, sought to explore how patients and the public are involved in digital health innovation and to identify factors that support and inhibit meaningful patient and public involvement (PPI) in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation. METHODS: Searches were undertaken from 2010 to July 2020 in the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and ACM Digital Library. Grey literature searches were also undertaken using the Patient Experience Library database and Google Scholar. RESULTS: Of the 10,540 articles identified, 433 were included. The majority of included articles were published in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, with representation from 42 countries highlighting the international relevance of PPI in digital health. 112 topic areas where PPI had reportedly taken place were identified. Areas most often described included cancer (n = 50), mental health (n = 43), diabetes (n = 26) and long-term conditions (n = 19). Interestingly, over 133 terms were used to describe PPI; few were explicitly defined. Patients were often most involved in the final, passive stages of an innovation journey, for example, usability testing, where the ability to proactively influence change was severely limited. Common barriers to achieving meaningful PPI included data privacy and security concerns, not involving patients early enough and lack of trust. Suggested enablers were often designed to counteract such challenges. CONCLUSIONS: PPI is largely viewed as valuable and essential in digital health innovation, but rarely practised. Several barriers exist for both innovators and patients, which currently limits the quality, frequency and duration of PPI in digital health innovation, although improvements have been made in the past decade. Some reported barriers and enablers such as the importance of data privacy and security appear to be unique to PPI in digital innovation. Greater efforts should be made to support innovators and patients to become meaningfully involved in digital health innovations from the outset, given its reported benefits and impacts. Stakeholder consensus on the principles that underpin meaningful PPI in digital health innovation would be helpful in providing evidence-based guidance on how to achieve this. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This review has received extensive patient and public contributions with a representative from the Patient Experience Library involved throughout the review's conception, from design (including suggested revisions to the search strategy) through to article production and dissemination. Other areas of patient and public contributor involvement include contributing to the inductive thematic analysis process, refining the thematic framework and finalizing theme wording, helping to ensure relevance, value and meaning from a patient perspective. Findings from this review have also been presented to a variety of stakeholders including patients, patient advocates and clinicians through a series of focus groups and webinars. Given their extensive involvement, the representative from the Patient Experience Library is rightly included as an author of this review.

The Role of Health Kiosks: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Health kiosks are publicly accessible computing devices that provide access to services, including health information provision, clinical measurement collection, patient self-check-in, telemonitoring, and teleconsultation. Although the increase in internet access and ownership of smart personal devices could make kiosks redundant, recent reports have predicted that the market will continue to grow. OBJECTIVE: We seek to clarify the current and future roles of health kiosks by investigating the settings, roles, and clinical domains in which kiosks are used; whether usability evaluations of health kiosks are being reported, and if so, what methods are being used; and what the barriers and facilitators are for the deployment of kiosks. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using a bibliographic search of Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science databases for studies and other publications between January 2009 and June 2020. Eligible papers described the implementation as primary studies, systematic reviews, or news and feature articles. Additional reports were obtained by manual searching and querying the key informants. For each article, we abstracted settings, purposes, health domains, whether the kiosk was opportunistic or integrated with a clinical pathway, and whether the kiosk included usability testing. We then summarized the data in frequency tables. RESULTS: A total of 141 articles were included, of which 134 (95%) were primary studies, and 7 (5%) were reviews. Approximately 47% (63/134) of the primary studies described kiosks in secondary care settings. Other settings included community (32/134, 23.9%), primary care (24/134, 17.9%), and pharmacies (8/134, 6%). The most common roles of the health kiosks were providing health information (47/134, 35.1%), taking clinical measurements (28/134, 20.9%), screening (17/134, 12.7%), telehealth (11/134, 8.2%), and patient registration (8/134, 6.0%). The 5 most frequent health domains were multiple conditions (33/134, 24.6%), HIV (10/134, 7.5%), hypertension (10/134, 7.5%), pediatric injuries (7/134, 5.2%), health and well-being (6/134, 4.5%), and drug monitoring (6/134, 4.5%). Kiosks were integrated into the clinical pathway in 70.1% (94/134) of studies, opportunistic kiosks accounted for 23.9% (32/134) of studies, and in 6% (8/134) of studies, kiosks were used in both. Usability evaluations of kiosks were reported in 20.1% (27/134) of papers. Barriers (e.g., use of expensive proprietary software) and enablers (e.g., handling of on-demand consultations) of deploying health kiosks were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Health kiosks still play a vital role in the health care system, including collecting clinical measurements and providing access to web-based health services and information to those with little or no digital literacy skills and others without personal internet access. We identified research gaps, such as training needs for teleconsultations and scant reporting on usability evaluation methods.

Exploring Patient and Staff Experiences With Video Consultations During COVID-19 in an English Outpatient Care Setting: Secondary Data Analysis of Routinely Collected Feedback Data.

BACKGROUND: Video consultations (VCs) were rapidly implemented in response to COVID-19 despite modest progress before. OBJECTIVE: We aim to explore staff and patient experiences with VCs implemented during COVID-19 and use feedback insights to support quality improvement and service development. METHODS: Secondary data analysis was conducted on 955 patient and 521 staff responses (from 4234 consultations; 955/4234, 22.6% and 521/4234, 12.3%, respectively) routinely collected following a VC between June and July 2020 in a rural, older adult, and outpatient care setting at a National Health Service Trust. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics and inductive thematic analysis and presented to Trust stakeholders. RESULTS: Most patients (890/955, 93.2%) reported having good (210/955, 22%) or very good (680/955, 71.2%) experience with VCs and felt listened to and understood (904/955, 94.7%). Most patients accessed their VC alone (806/955, 84.4%) except for those aged ≥71 years (23/58, 40%), with ease of joining VCs negatively associated with age (P<.001). Despite more difficulties joining, older adults were most likely to be satisfied with the technology (46/58, 79%). Patients and staff generally felt that patients' needs had been met (860/955, 90.1% and 453/521, 86.9%, respectively), although staff appeared to overestimate patient dissatisfaction with VC outcomes (P=.02). Patients (848/955, 88.8%) and staff (419/521, 80.5%) felt able to communicate everything they wanted, although patients were significantly more positive than staff (P<.001). Patient satisfaction with communication was positively associated with technical performance satisfaction (P<.001). Most staff members (466/521, 89.4%) reported positive (185/521, 35.5%) or very positive (281/521, 53.9%) experiences with joining and managing VCs. Staff reported reductions in carbon footprint (380/521, 72.9%) and time (373/521, 71.6%). Most patients (880/955, 92.1%) would choose VCs again. We identified three themes in responses: barriers, including technological difficulties, patient information, and suitability concerns; potential benefits, including reduced stress, enhanced accessibility, cost, and time savings; and suggested improvements, including trial calls, turning music off, photo uploads, expanding written character limit, supporting other internet browsers, and shared online screens. This routine feedback, including evidence to suggest that patients were more satisfied than clinicians had anticipated, was presented to relevant Trust stakeholders, allowing for improved processes and supporting the development of a business case to inform the Trust decision on continuing VCs beyond COVID-19 restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the importance of regularly reviewing and responding to routine feedback following digital service implementation. The feedback helped the Trust improve the VC service, challenge clinician-held assumptions about patient experience, and inform future use of VCs. It has focused improvement efforts on patient information; technological improvements such as blurred backgrounds and interactive whiteboards; and responding to the needs of patients with dementia, communication or cognitive impairment, or lack of appropriate technology. These findings have implications for other health care providers.

Use and usability of GP online services: a mixed-methods sequential study, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, based on qualitative interviews, analysis of routine eConsult usage and feedback data, and assessment of GP websites in Devon and Cornwall, England.

OBJECTIVES: We explored use and usability of general practitioner (GP) online services. SETTING: Devon and Cornwall, England. DESIGN: Mixed-methods sequential study based on qualitative interviews, analysis of routine eConsult usage and feedback data, and assessment of GP websites. METHODS: First, we interviewed 32 staff and 18 patients from seven practices in June 2018. Second, we used routinely collected consultation meta-data and, third, patient feedback data for all practices using eConsult from June 2018 to March 2021. Lastly, we examined GP websites' usability in January 2020 and September 2021. RESULTS: Interviews suggested practices infrequently involved patients in eConsult implementation. Some patients 'gamed' the system to achieve what they wanted. Usage data showed a major increase in eConsult resulting from COVID-19. Women used eConsult twice as much as men. Older had similar eConsult consultation rates to younger patients. Patient feedback forms were completed for fewer than 3% of consultations. Patients were mostly satisfied with eConsult but some had concerns about its length and repetitiveness, lack of continuity over time and between eConsult and medical records. We did not find clear evidence that patients' suggested improvements were acted on. Finally, few GP websites met accessibility guidelines and may hinder access to online national services such as eConsult. CONCLUSION: Given that, face to face, older people consult more, usage data suggest that older people have reduced online access. That the female-to-male ratio of eConsult use use was even greater than 'traditional' face-to-face ratio was unexpected and needs further research. Although eConsult collects and uses routine patient feedback to improve the system, more open systems for patient feedback, such as Care Opinion, may be more effective in helping online systems evolve. Lastly, we question the need for GP websites and suggest that national or regional services are better placed to maintain accessible services.

The Potential Impacts of a Digital Preoperative Assessment Service on Appointments, Travel-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and User Experience: Case Study.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) cannot keep up with the demand for operations and procedures. Preoperative assessments can be conducted on the internet to improve efficiency and reduce wait times for operations. MyPreOp is a cloud-based platform where patients can complete preoperative questionnaires. These are reviewed by a nurse who determines whether they need a subsequent face-to-face appointment. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to describe the potential impact of MyPreOp (Ultramed Ltd) on the number of face-to-face appointments. The secondary objectives are to examine the time spent on preoperative assessments completed using MyPreOp in NHS Trusts and user ratings of usability and acceptability. METHODS: The study design was a case study service evaluation. Data were collected using the MyPreOp system from 2 NHS Trusts (Guy's and St Thomas' and Royal United Hospitals Bath) and the private BMI Bath Clinic during the 4-month period from September to December 2020. Participants were adults of any age and health status at the participating hospitals who used MyPreOp to complete a preoperative assessment before a scheduled surgery. The primary outcome was the number of face-to-face appointments avoided by patients who used MyPreOp. The investigated secondary outcomes included the length of time spent by nurses completing preoperative assessments, associated travel-related carbon dioxide emissions compared with standard care, and quantitative user feedback. User feedback was assessed at all 3 sites; however, the other outcomes could only be examined in the Royal United Hospitals Bath sample because of data limitations. RESULTS: Data from 2500 participants were included. Half of the assessed patients did not need a further face-to-face appointment and required a median of only 5.3 minutes of nurses' time to review. The reduction in appointments was associated with a small saving of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (9.05 tons). Patient feedback was generally positive: 79.8% (317/397) of respondents rated MyPreOp as easy or very easy to use, and 85.2% (340/399) thought the overall experience was good or very good. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation demonstrates the potential benefits of MyPreOp. However, further research using rigorous scientific methodology and a larger sample of NHS Trusts and users is needed to provide strong evidence of MyPreOp's efficacy, usability, and cost-effectiveness.

Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Anesthetic preoperative assessment (POA) is now a common part of the surgical care pathway, and guidelines support its routine use. MyPreOp (Ultramed Ltd) is a web-based POA system that enables remote assessments. Usability is a key factor in the success of digital health solutions. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the usability of the MyPreOp system through patient feedback, investigate the amount of time it took for patients to complete the POA questionnaire and the factors that influenced completion time, and explore the effect on completion times of implementing a validated eHealth usability scale, as compared to using a simple but unvalidated usability evaluation scale, and to test the feasibility of administering a more detailed usability evaluation scale in a staggered manner so as not to unduly increase completion times. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, anonymized data sets were extracted from the MyPreOp system. The participants were adults (aged ≥18 years), scheduled for nonurgent surgical procedures performed in hospitals in the United Kingdom, who gave consent for their anonymized data to be analyzed. Data collected included age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical classification status, and completion time. Two user experience evaluations were used: in Phase 1, 2 questions asking about overall experience and ease of use, and in Phase 2, a previously validated usability questionnaire, with its 20 questions equally distributed among 5 succeeding patient cohorts. There were 2593 respondents in total (Phase 1: n=1193; Phase 2: n=1400). The median age of the participants was 46 years, and 1520 (58.62%) of the 2593 respondents were female. End points measured were the median completion times in Phase I and Phase II. The data were collected by extracting a subset of records from the database and exported to a spreadsheet for analysis (Excel, Microsoft Corporation). The data were analyzed for differences in completion times between Phase I and Phase II, as well as for differences between age groups, genders, and ASA classifications. RESULTS: MyPreOp scored well in usability in both phases. In Phase 1, 81.64% (974/1193) of respondents had a good or better experience, and 93.8% (1119/1193) found it easy to use. The usability rating in Phase 2 was 4.13 out of a maximum of 5, indicating high usability. The median completion time was 40.4 minutes. The implementation of the longer usability evaluation scale in Phase 2 did not negatively impact the completion times. Age and ASA physical status were found to be moderately associated with increased completion times. CONCLUSIONS: MyPreOp rates high in both user experience and usability. The method of dividing the questionnaire into 5 blocks is valid and does not negatively affect completion times. Further research into the factors affecting completion time is recommended.

The Use of Smart Speakers in Care Home Residents: Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of smart speakers to improve well-being had been trialed in social care by others; however, we were not aware of their implementation in most care homes across a region in the Southwest of the United Kingdom. For the widespread adoption of new technology, it must be locally demonstrable and become normalized. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to install smart speakers in care homes in a rural and coastal region and to explore if and how the devices were being used, the barriers to their implementation, and their potential benefits. METHODS: Email, workshops, drop-in sessions, phone, and cold calling was used to contact all 230 care homes, offering a free smart speaker and some advisory support. Care homes accepting the devices were asked to complete a feedback diary. Nonresponse rate for diary completion was high and was thus supplemented with a telephone survey. RESULTS: Over the course of 7 months, we installed 156 devices in 92 care homes for older people, 50 devices for people with physical or mental health needs, and 8 for others. The devices were used mainly for music but also for poetry, recipes, light controls, jokes, and video calls. Care home managers reported the benefits for the residents, including enhanced engagement with home activities, enjoyment, calming effects, and the acquisition of new skills. Implementation problems included internet connectivity, staff capacity, and skills. CONCLUSIONS: Affordable consumer devices such as smart speakers should be installed in all care homes to benefit residents. Voice-activated technologies are easy to use and promote interaction. This study indicates that implementation in care homes was possible and that smart speakers had multifaceted benefits for residents and staff. Most care homes in this region now use smart speakers for their residents, thereby normalizing this practice.

The Effectiveness and Usability of Online, Group-Based Interventions for People With Severe Obesity: Protocol for a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Globally, obesity is a growing crisis. Despite obesity being preventable, over a quarter of the UK adult population is currently considered clinically obese (typically body mass index ≥35 kg/m2). Access to treatment for people with severe obesity is limited by long wait times and local availability. Online and group-based interventions provide means of increasing the accessibility of obesity prevention and treatment services. However, there has been no prior review of the effectiveness of group-based interventions delivered online for people with severe obesity. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review protocol is to provide an evaluation of the effectiveness and usability of different types of online, group-based interventions for people with severe obesity. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) frameworks were used to structure this review. The review will systematically search 7 databases: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, APA PsycNet, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses databases. Two authors (MM-I and LB) will independently screen the titles and abstracts of identified articles, select studies for inclusion based on the eligibility criteria, and extract data into a standardized form. Any disagreements will be discussed and resolved by a third reviewer (EM) if necessary. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2 tool and a descriptive analysis will be used to evaluate effectiveness and usability. RESULTS: The systematic review has not yet been started. It is expected to be completed and submitted for publication by December 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review will summarize the effectiveness and usability of online, group-based interventions for people with obesity. It will identify the types of online delivery that have the strongest support to help inform the development of more useful and engaging interventions for people with severe obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Institute for Health Research, PROSPERO CRD42021227101; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021227101. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/26619.

The use of video for patient information and education: A scoping review of the variability and effectiveness of interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of video interventions used for patient information and education, and of the tools used to evaluate their effectiveness, in order to consider the feasibility of developing generic guidelines and appraisal tools for the use of video in patient care. METHODS: A scoping review was carried out to describe and synthesise emerging knowledge, using thematic analysis of data. Studies focussed upon videos for health professional education were excluded, as were those which consider the impact of videos available via social media. RESULTS: A narrative overview of 65 identified papers provides insight into the range and scope of studies. Common themes emerge, notably the aim of reducing anxiety and the variety of instruments designed to measure this. The use of self-report questionnaires was common, but their design is variable. CONCLUSION: Targeted video-based intervention can improve patient experience and outcomes. High utility guidelines and appraisal tools, transferable between contexts, are needed to facilitate deployments at scale for sustainable outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Video production guidelines and appraisal tools will be of value to those engaged in video development and deployment. Guidance should be based upon emerging evidence of effectiveness and incorporate an emphasis on reusability.

Barriers and Enablers in Implementing Electronic Consultations in Primary Care: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Often promoted as a way to address increasing demands, improve patient accessibility, and improve overall efficiency, electronic consultations are becoming increasingly common in primary care, particularly in light of the current COVID-19 pandemic. However, despite their increasing use, a theoretically informed understanding of the factors that support and inhibit their effective implementation is severely limited. OBJECTIVE: With this scoping review, we sought to identify the factors that support and inhibit the implementation of electronic consultations in primary care. METHODS: In total, 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) were systematically searched for studies published in 2009-2019 that explored the impact and/or implementation of electronic consultations in primary care. Database searches were supplemented by reference list and grey literature searches. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and synthesized using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). RESULTS: In total, 227 articles were initially identified and 13 were included in this review. The main factors found to hinder implementation included awareness and expectations; low levels of engagement; perceived suitability for all patient groups, conditions, and demographics; cost; and other contextual factors. Reports of information technology reliability and clinical workload duplication (as opposed to reduction) also appeared detrimental. Conversely, the development of protocols and guidance; patient and staff education; strategic marketing; and patient and public involvement were all identified as beneficial in facilitating electronic consultation implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the need for proactive engagement with patients and staff to facilitate understanding and awareness, process optimization, and delivery of coherent training and education that maximizes impact and success. Although the necessity to use online methods during the COVID-19 pandemic may have accelerated awareness, concerns over workload duplication and inequality of access may remain. Future research should explore health inequalities in electronic consultations and their economic impacts from multiple perspectives (eg, patient, professional, and commissioner) to determine their potential value. Further work to identify the role of meaningful patient involvement in digital innovation, implementation, and evaluation is also required following the rapid digitization of health and social care.

Methods of usability testing in the development of eHealth applications: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The number of eHealth applications has exponentially increased in recent years, with over 325,000 health apps now available on all major app stores. This is in addition to other eHealth applications available on other platforms such as PC software, web sites and even gaming consoles. As with other digital applications, usability is one of the key factors in the successful implementation of eHealth apps. Reviews of the literature on empirical methods of usability testing in eHealth were last published in 2015. In the context of an exponentially increasing rate of App development year on year, an updated review is warranted. OBJECTIVE: To identify, explore, and summarize the current methods used in the usability testing of eHealth applications. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted on literature available from April 2014 up to October 2017. Four databases were searched. Literature was considered for inclusion if it was (1) focused on an eHealth application (which includes websites, PC software, smartphone and tablet applications), (2) provided information about usability of the application, (3) provided empirical results of the usability testing, (4) a full or short paper (not an abstract) published in English after March 2014. We then extracted data pertaining to the usability evaluation processes described in the selected studies. RESULTS: 133 articles met the inclusion criteria. The methods used for usability testing, in decreasing order of frequency were: questionnaires (n = 105), task completion (n = 57), 'Think-Aloud' (n = 45), interviews (n = 37), heuristic testing (n = 18) and focus groups (n = 13). Majority of the studies used one (n = 45) or two (n = 46) methods of testing. The rest used a combination of three (n = 30) or four (n = 12) methods of testing usability. None of the studies used automated mechanisms to test usability. The System Usability Scale (SUS) was the most frequently used questionnaire (n = 44). The ten most frequent health conditions or diseases where eHealth apps were being evaluated for usability were the following: mental health (n = 12), cancer (n = 10), nutrition (n = 10), child health (n = 9), diabetes (n = 9), telemedicine (n = 8), cardiovascular disease (n = 6), HIV (n = 4), health information systems (n = 4) and smoking (n = 4). Further iterations of the app were reported in a minority of the studies (n = 41). The use of the 'Think-Aloud' (Pearson Chi-squared test: χ2 = 11.15, p < 0.05) and heuristic walkthrough (Pearson Chi-squared test: χ2 = 4.48, p < 0.05) were significantly associated with at least one further iteration of the app being developed. CONCLUSION: Although there has been an exponential increase in the number of eHealth apps, the number of studies that have been published that report the results of usability testing on these apps has not increased at an equivalent rate. The number of digital health applications that publish their usability evaluation results remains only a small fraction. Questionnaires are the most prevalent method of evaluating usability in eHealth applications, which provide an overall measure of usability but do not pinpoint the problems that need to be addressed. Qualitative methods may be more useful in this regard. The use of multiple evaluation methods has increased. Automated methods such as eye tracking have not gained traction in evaluating health apps. Further research is needed into which methods are best suited for the different types of eHealth applications, according to their target users and the health conditions being addressed.

Validation of Multisource Feedback in Assessing Medical Performance: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past 10 years, a number of systematic reviews have evaluated the validity of multisource feedback (MSF) to assess and quality-assure medical practice. The purpose of this study is to synthesize the results from existing reviews to provide a holistic overview of the validity evidence. METHODS: This review identified eight systematic reviews evaluating the validity of MSF published between January 2006 and October 2016. Using a standardized data extraction form, two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics. A framework of validation developed by the American Psychological Association was used to appraise the validity evidence within each systematic review. RESULTS: In terms of validity evidence, each of the eight reviews demonstrated evidence across at least one domain of the American Psychological Association's validity framework. Evidence of assessment validity within the domains of "internal structure" and "relationship to other variables" has been well established. However, the domains of content validity (ie, ensuring that MSF tools measure what they are intended to measure); consequential validity (ie, evidence of the intended or unintended consequences MSF assessments may have on participants or wider society), and response process validity (ie, the process of standardization and quality control in the delivery and completion of assessments) remain limited. DISCUSSION: Evidence for the validity of MSF has, across a number of domains, been well established. However, the size and quality of the existing evidence remains variable. To determine the extent to which MSF is considered a valid instrument to assess medical performance, future research is required to determine the following: (1) how best to design and deliver MSF assessments that address the identified limitations of existing tools and (2) how to ensure that involvement within MSF supports positive changes in practice. Such research is integral if MSF is to continue to inform medical performance and subsequent improvements in the quality and safety of patient care.

Health Worker Focused Distributed Simulation for Improving Capability of Health Systems in Liberia.

INTRODUCTION: The main goal of this study was to produce an adaptable learning platform using virtual learning and distributed simulation, which can be used to train health care workers, across a wide geographical area, key safety messages regarding infection prevention control (IPC). METHODS: A situationally responsive agile methodology, Scrum, was used to develop a distributed simulation module using short 1-week iterations and continuous synchronous plus asynchronous communication including end users and IPC experts. The module contained content related to standard IPC precautions (including handwashing techniques) and was structured into 3 distinct sections related to donning, doffing, and hazard perception training. OUTCOME: Using Scrum methodology, we were able to link concepts applied to best practices in simulation-based medical education (deliberate practice, continuous feedback, self-assessment, and exposure to uncommon events), pedagogic principles related to adult learning (clear goals, contextual awareness, motivational features), and key learning outcomes regarding IPC, as a rapid response initiative to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. Gamification approach has been used to map learning mechanics to enhance user engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The developed IPC module demonstrates how high-frequency, low-fidelity simulations can be rapidly designed using scrum-based agile methodology. Analytics incorporated into the tool can help demonstrate improved confidence and competence of health care workers who are treating patients within an Ebola virus disease outbreak region. These concepts could be used in a range of evolving disasters where rapid development and communication of key learning messages are required.