Ethics in Telehealth: Comparison between Guidelines and Practice-based Experience -the Case for Learning Health Systems

Author:

Kuziemsky Craig E.1,Hunter Inga2,Gogia Shashi B.3,lyenger Sriram4,Kulatunga Gumindu5,Rajput Vije6,Subbian Vignesh7,John Oommen8,Kleber Araujo9,Mandirola Humberto F.10,Florez-Arango Jose11,Al-Shorbaji Najeeb12,Meher Sushil13,Udayasankaran Jai Ganesh14,Basu Arindam15

Affiliation:

1. Office of Research Services and School of Business, MacEwan University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

2. School of Management, Massey University, New Zealand

3. Society for Administration of Telemedicine and Healthcare Informatics (SATHI), New Delhi, India

4. University of Arizona College of Medicine, USA

5. Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka

6. General Practitioner, Stonydelph Health Centre, Tamworth, UK

7. College of Engineering, The University of Arizona, USA

8. George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, New Delhi, India

9. NUTES Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil

10. Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Argentina

11. Texas A & M Health Sciences Center, USA

12. eHealth Development Association of Jordan, Jordan

13. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India

14. Sri Sathya Sai Central Trust, India

15. School of Health Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

Abstract

Summary Objectives: To understand ethical issues within the tele-health domain, specifically how well established macro level telehealth guidelines map with micro level practitioner perspectives. Methods: We developed four overarching issues to use as a starting point for developing an ethical framework for telehealth. We then reviewed telemedicine ethics guidelines elaborated by the American Medical Association (AMA), the World Medical Association (WMA), and the telehealth component of the Health Professions council of South Africa (HPCSA). We then compared these guidelines with practitioner perspectives to identify the similarities and differences between them. Finally, we generated suggestions to bridge the gap between ethics guidelines and the micro level use of telehealth. Results: Clear differences emerged between the ethics guidelines and the practitioner perspectives. The main reason for the differences were the different contexts where telehealth was used, for example, variability in international practice and variations in the complexity of patient-provider interactions. Overall, published guidelines largely focus on macro level issues related to technology and maintaining data security in patient-provider interactions while practitioner concern is focused on applying the guidelines to specific micro level contexts. Conclusions: Ethics guidelines on telehealth have a macro level focus in contrast to the micro level needs of practitioners. Work is needed to close this gap. We recommend that both telehealth practitioners and ethics guideline developers better understand healthcare systems and adopt a learning health system approach that draws upon different contexts of clinical practice, innovative models of care delivery, emergent data and evidence-based outcomes. This would help develop a clearer set of priorities and guidelines for the ethical conduct of telehealth.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

General Medicine

Reference20 articles.

1. Understanding Unintended Consequences and Health Information Technology: Contribution from the IMIA Organizational and Social Issues Working Group;C E Kuziemsky;Yearb Med Inform,2016

2. Balancing Health Information Exchange and Privacy Governance from a Patient-Centred Connected Health and Telehealth Perspective;C E Kuziemsky;Yearb Med Inform,2018

3. The unintended consequences of health information technology revisited;E Coiera;Yearb Med Inform,2016

4. AMIA's code of professional and ethical conduct 2018;C Petersen;J Am Med Inform Assoc,2018

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3