Barriers and facilitators of the uptake of digital health technology in cardiovascular care: a systematic scoping review

Author:

Whitelaw Sera1,Pellegrini Danielle M2,Mamas Mamas A34,Cowie Martin5ORCID,Van Spall Harriette G C1678ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8, Canada

2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

3. Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9PL, UK

4. Keele Cardiovascular Research Group, Keele University, Newcastle ST5 5BG, UK

5. Faculty of Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK

6. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, 20 Copeland Avenue, David Braley Research Building, Suite C3-117, Hamilton, ON L8L 0A3, Canada

7. Population Health Research Institute, 20 Copeland Ave, Hamilton, Ontario L8L 2X2, Canada

8. ICES, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8, Canada

Abstract

Abstract Digital health technology (DHT) has the potential to revolutionize healthcare delivery but its uptake has been low in clinical and research settings. The factors that contribute to the limited adoption of DHT, particularly in cardiovascular settings, are unclear. The objective of this review was to determine the barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake from the perspective of patients, clinicians, and researchers. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for studies published from inception to May 2020 that reported barriers and/or facilitators of DHT adoption in cardiovascular care. We extracted data on study design, setting, cardiovascular condition, and type of DHT. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake. The search identified 3075 unique studies, of which 29 studies met eligibility criteria. Studies employed: qualitative methods (n = 13), which included interviews and focus groups; quantitative methods (n = 5), which included surveys; or a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (n = 11). Twenty-five studies reported patient-level barriers, most common of which were difficult-to-use technology (n = 7) and a poor internet connection (n = 7). Six studies reported clinician-level barriers, which included increased workload (n = 4) and a lack of integration with electronic medical records (n = 3).Twenty-four studies reported patient-level facilitators, which included improved communication with clinicians (n = 10) and personalized technology (n = 6). Four studies reported clinician-level facilitators, which included approval and organizational support from cardiology departments and/or hospitals (n = 3) and technologies that improved efficiency (n = 3). No studies reported researcher-level barriers or facilitators. In summary, internet access, user-friendliness, organizational support, workflow efficiency, and data integration were reported as important factors in the uptake of DHT by patients and clinicians. These factors can be considered when selecting and implementing DHTs in cardiovascular clinical settings.

Funder

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

McMaster University Department of Medicine and Women As One Escalator Award

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

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