BackgroundMany countries have implemented interventions to enhance primary care to strengthen their health systems. These programmes vary widely in features included and their impact on outcomes... Show moreBackgroundMany countries have implemented interventions to enhance primary care to strengthen their health systems. These programmes vary widely in features included and their impact on outcomes.AimTo identify multiple-feature interventions aimed at enhancing primary care and their effects on measures of system success — that is, population health, healthcare costs and utilisation, patient satisfaction, and provider satisfaction (quadruple-aim outcomes).Design and settingSystematic review and narrative synthesis.MethodElectronic, manual, and grey-literature searches were performed for articles describing multicomponent primary care interventions, providing details of their innovation features, relationship to the ‘4Cs’ (first contact, comprehensiveness, coordination, and continuity), and impact on quadruple-aim outcomes. After abstract and full-text screening, articles were selected and their quality appraised. Results were synthesised in a narrative form.ResultsFrom 37 included articles, most interventions aimed to improve access, enhance incentives for providers, provide team-based care, and introduce technologies. The most consistent improvements related to increased primary care visits and screening/preventive services, and improved patient and provider satisfaction; mixed results were found for hospital admissions, emergency department visits, and expenditures. The available data were not sufficient to link interventions, achievement of the 4Cs, and outcomes.ConclusionMost analysed interventions improved some aspects of primary care while, simultaneously, producing non-statistically significant impacts, depending on the features of the interventions, the measured outcome(s), and the populations being studied. A critical research gap was revealed, namely, in terms of which intervention features to enhance primary care (alone or in combination) produce the most consistent benefits. Show less
Jimenez, G.; Matchar, D.; Koh, G.C.H.; Tyagi, S.; Kleij, R.M.J.J. van der; Chavannes, N.H.; Car, J. 2021
Background: The four primary care (PC) core functions (the '4Cs', ie, first contact, comprehensiveness, coordination and continuity) are essential for good quality primary healthcare and their... Show moreBackground: The four primary care (PC) core functions (the '4Cs', ie, first contact, comprehensiveness, coordination and continuity) are essential for good quality primary healthcare and their achievement leads to lower costs, less inequality and better population health. However, their broad definitions have led to variations in their assessment, in the innovations implemented to improve these functions and ultimately in their performance. Objectives: To update and operationalise the 4Cs' definitions by using a literature review and analysis of enhancement strategies, and to identify innovations that may lead to their enhancement. Methods: Narrative, descriptive analysis of the 4Cs definitions, coming from PC international reports and organisations, to identify measurable features for each of these functions. Additionally, we performed an electronic search and analysis of enhancement strategies to improve these four Cs, to explore how the 4Cs inter-relate. Results: Specific operational elements for first contact include modality of contact, and conditions for which PC should be approached; for comprehensiveness, scope of services and spectrum of population needs; for coordination, links between PC and higher levels of care and social/community-based services, and workforce managing transitions and for continuity, type, level and context of continuity. Several innovations like enrolment, digital health technologies and new or enhanced PC provider's roles, simultaneously influenced two or more of the 4Cs. Conclusion: Providing clear, well-defined operational elements for these 4Cs to measure their achievement and improve the way they function, and identifying the complex network of interactions among them, should contribute to the field in a way that supports efforts at practice innovation to optimise the processes and outcomes in PC. Show less
Jimenez, G.; Matchar, D.; Koh, C.H.G.; Kleij, R. van der; Chavannes, N.H.; Car, J. 2021
Background: Several countries around the world have implemented multicomponent interventions to enhance primary care, as a way of strengthening their health systems to cope with an aging... Show moreBackground: Several countries around the world have implemented multicomponent interventions to enhance primary care, as a way of strengthening their health systems to cope with an aging chronically ill population and rising costs. Some of these efforts have included technology-based enhancements as one of the features to support the overall intervention, but their details and impacts have not been explored.Objective: This study aimed to identify the role of digital/health technologies within wider multifeature interventions that are aimed at enhancing primary care, and to describe their aims and stakeholders, types of technologies used, and potential impacts.Methods: A systematic review was performed following Cochrane guidelines. An electronic search, conducted on May 30, 2019, was supplemented with manual and grey literature searches in December 2019, to identify multicomponent interventions that included at least one technology-based enhancement. After title/abstract and full text screening, selected articles were assessed for quality based on their study design. A descriptive narrative synthesis was used for analysis and presentation of the results.Results: Of 37 articles, 14 (38%) described the inclusion of a technology-based innovation as part of their multicomponent interventions to enhance primary care. The most commonly identified technologies were the use of electronic health records, data monitoring technologies, and online portals with messaging platforms. The most common aim of these technologies was to improve continuity of care and comprehensiveness, which resulted in increased patient satisfaction, increased primary care visits compared to specialist visits, and the provision of more health prevention education and improved prescribing practices. Technologies seem also to increase costs and utilization for some parameters, such as increased consultation costs and increased number of drugs prescribed.Conclusions: Technologies and digital health have not played a major role within comprehensive innovation efforts aimed at enhancing primary care, reflecting that these technologies have not yet reached maturity or wider acceptance as a means for improving primary care. Stronger policy and financial support, and advocacy of key stakeholders are needed to encourage the introduction of efficient technological innovations, which are backed by evidence-based research, so that digital technologies can fulfill the promise of supporting strong sustainable primary care. Show less
Jimenez, G.; Matchar, D.; Koh, C.H.G.; Kleij, R. van der; Chavannes, N.H.; Car, J. 2021
Background: Digital health technologies can be key to improving health outcomes, provided health care workers are adequately trained to use these technologies. There have been efforts to identify... Show moreBackground: Digital health technologies can be key to improving health outcomes, provided health care workers are adequately trained to use these technologies. There have been efforts to identify digital competencies for different health care worker groups; however, an overview of these efforts has yet to be consolidated and analyzed.Objective: The review aims to identify and study existing digital health competency frameworks for health care workers and provide recommendations for future digital health training initiatives and framework development.Methods: A literature search was performed to collate digital health competency frameworks published from 2000. A total of 6 databases including gray literature sources such as OpenGrey, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, Google, and websites of relevant associations were searched in November 2019. Screening and data extraction were performed in parallel by the reviewers. The included evidence is narratively described in terms of characteristics, evolution, and structural composition of frameworks. A thematic analysis was also performed to identify common themes across the included frameworks.Results: In total, 30 frameworks were included in this review, a majority of which aimed at nurses, originated from high-income countries, were published since 2016, and were developed via literature reviews, followed by expert consultations. The thematic analysis uncovered 28 digital health competency domains across the included frameworks. The most prevalent domains pertained to basic information technology literacy, health information management, digital communication, ethical, legal, or regulatory requirements, and data privacy and security. The Health Information Technology Competencies framework was found to be the most comprehensive framework, as it presented 21 out of the 28 identified domains, had the highest number of competencies, and targeted a wide variety of health care workers.Conclusions: Digital health training initiatives should focus on competencies relevant to a particular health care worker group, role, level of seniority, and setting. The findings from this review can inform and guide digital health training initiatives. The most prevalent competency domains identified represent essential interprofessional competencies to be incorporated into health care workers' training. Digital health frameworks should be regularly updated with novel digital health technologies, be applicable to low- and middle-income countries, and include overlooked health care worker groups such as allied health professionals. Show less
Jimenez, G.; Spinazze, P.; Matchar, D.; Huat, G.K.C.; Kleij, R.M.J.J. van der; Chavannes, N.H.; Car, J. 2020
Background: Despite digital health providing opportunities to enhance the quality, efficiency and safety of primary healthcare, the adoption of digital tools and technologies has been slow, partly... Show moreBackground: Despite digital health providing opportunities to enhance the quality, efficiency and safety of primary healthcare, the adoption of digital tools and technologies has been slow, partly because of poor digital health literacy. For primary healthcare systems to take full advantage of these technologies, a capable, digitally literate workforce is necessary. Still, the essential digital health competencies (DHCs) for primary healthcare have not been explored. This review aims to examine the broad literature on DHCs as it applies to Primary Care (PC) settings.Methods: We performed a scoping review on all types of research linking DHCs to PC. We searched all major databases including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library in November 2019. Concurrently, a thorough grey literature search was performed through OpenGrey, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, and key government and relevant professional associations' websites. Screening and selection of studies was performed in pairs, and data was analysed and presented using a narrative, descriptive approach. Thematic analysis was performed to identify key DHC domains.Results: A total of 28 articles were included, most of them (54 %) published before 2005. These articles were primarily aimed at PC physicians or general practitioners, and focused on improving knowledge about information technologies and medical informatics, basic computer and information literacy, and optimal use of electronic medical records. We identified 17 DHC domains, and important knowledge gaps related to digital health education and curriculum integration, the need for evidence of the impact of services, and the importance of wider support for digital health.Conclusions: Literature explicitly linking DHCs to PC was mostly published over a decade ago. There is a need for an updated and current set of DHCs for PC professionals to more consistently reap the benefits of digital technologies. This review identified key DHC domains and statements that may be used to guide on the development of a set of DHC for PC, and critical knowledge gaps and needs to be considered. Such a DHC set may be used for curricula development and for ensuring that the essential DHC for PC are met at a clinical or organizational level, and eventually improve health outcomes. Show less
Jimenez, G.; Tyagi, S.; Osman, T.; Spinazze, P.; Kleij, R. van der; Chavannes, N.H.; Car, J. 2020
Background: Digital medical interview assistant (DMIA) systems, also known as computer-assisted history taking (CAHT) systems, have the potential to improve the quality of care and the medical... Show moreBackground: Digital medical interview assistant (DMIA) systems, also known as computer-assisted history taking (CAHT) systems, have the potential to improve the quality of care and the medical consultation by exploring more patient-related aspects without time constraints and, therefore, acquiring more and better-quality information prior to the face-to-face consultation. The consultation in primary care is the broadest in terms of the amount of topics to be covered and, at the same time, the shortest in terms of time spent with the patient.Objective: Our aim is to explore how DMIA systems may be used specifically in the context of primary care, to improve the consultations for diabetes and depression, as exemplars of chronic conditions.Methods: A narrative review was conducted focusing on (1) the characteristics of the primary care consultation in general, and for diabetes and depression specifically, and (2) the impact of DMIA and CAHT systems on the medical consultation. Through thematic analysis, we identified the characteristics of the primary care consultation that a DMIA system would be able to improve. Based on the identified primary care consultation tasks and the potential benefits of DMIA systems, we developed a sample questionnaire for diabetes and depression to illustrate how such a system may work.Results: A DMIA system, prior to the first consultation, could aid in the essential primary care tasks of case finding and screening, diagnosing, and, if needed, timely referral to specialists or urgent care. Similarly, for follow-up consultations, this system could aid with the control and monitoring of these conditions, help check for additional health issues, and update the primary care provider about visits to other providers or further testing. Successfully implementing a DMIA system for these tasks would improve the quality of the data obtained, which means earlier diagnosis and treatment. Such a system would improve the use of face-to-face consultation time, thereby streamlining the interaction and allowing the focus to be the patient's needs, which ultimately would lead to better health outcomes and patient satisfaction. However, for such a system to be successfully incorporated, there are important considerations to be taken into account, such as the language to be used and the challenges for implementing eHealth innovations in primary care and health care in general.Conclusions: Given the benefits explored here, we foresee that DMIA systems could have an important impact in the primary care consultation for diabetes and depression and, potentially, for other chronic conditions. Earlier case finding and a more accurate diagnosis, due to more and better-quality data, paired with improved monitoring of disease progress should improve the quality of care and keep the management of chronic conditions at the primary care level. A somewhat simple, easily scalable technology could go a long way to improve the health of the millions of people affected with chronic conditions, especially if working in conjunction with already-established health technologies such as electronic medical records and clinical decision support systems. Show less
Background Control of blood glucose levels is needed not only to alleviate symptoms of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, but also to prevent or delay diabetes-related complications. Advice for... Show moreBackground Control of blood glucose levels is needed not only to alleviate symptoms of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, but also to prevent or delay diabetes-related complications. Advice for glucose control is usually provided to patients by members of the health care team. However, many diabetes apps claim to enhance self-management of blood glucose by providing decision support to patients when an out-of-range blood glucose level is recorded. In this study, we investigated the appropriateness of action prompts provided by diabetes apps for hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia against evidence-based guidelines. Methods We used methods previously reported to identify and select diabetes apps, which were downloaded and assessed against the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. Screenshots of action prompts corresponding to low or high out-of-range blood glucose values were subjected to content analysis. Results Of 371 diabetes self-management apps evaluated, only 217 and 216 apps alerted patients about hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, respectively. Of these, 20.7% (45/217) and 15.3% (33/216) also provided action prompts. We found 5.1% of apps (hypoglycaemia: 11/217; hyperglycaemia: 11/216) provided prompts that were either too general to be helpful or not aligned with ADA guidelines. Overall, only 17.9% (39/217) and 14.8% (32/216) provided appropriate action prompts for hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, respectively. Conclusion Less than one fifth of apps provided evidence-based steps to guide patients through hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia. The majority of apps failed to provide just-in-time diabetes self-management education to prevent frequent or severe episodes of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia. Our findings emphasize the need for better design and quality assurance of diabetes apps. Show less
Huang, Z.L.; Lum, E.; Jimenez, G.; Semwal, M.; Sloot, P.; Car, J. 2019
BackgroundSmartphone apps are becoming increasingly popular for supporting diabetes self-management. A key aspect of diabetes self-management is appropriate medication-taking. This study aims to... Show moreBackgroundSmartphone apps are becoming increasingly popular for supporting diabetes self-management. A key aspect of diabetes self-management is appropriate medication-taking. This study aims to systematically assess and characterise the medication management features in diabetes self-management apps and their congruence with best-practice evidence-based criteria.MethodsThe Google Play and Apple app stores were searched in June 2018 using diabetes-related terms in the English language. Apps with both medication and blood glucose management features were downloaded and evaluated against assessment criteria derived from international medication management and diabetes guidelines.ResultsOur search yielded 3369 Android and 1799 iOS potentially relevant apps; of which, 143 apps (81 Android, 62 iOS) met inclusion criteria and were downloaded and assessed. Over half 58.0% (83/143) of the apps had a medication reminder feature; 16.8% (24/143) had a feature to review medication adherence; 39.9% (57/143) allowed entry of medication-taking instructions; 5.6% (8/143) provided information about medication; and 4.2% (6/143) displayed motivational messages to encourage medication-taking. Only two apps prompted users on the use of complementary medicine. Issues such as limited medication logging capacity, faulty reminder features, unclear medication adherence assessment, and visually distracting excessive advertising were observed during app assessments.ConclusionsA large proportion of diabetes self-management apps lacked features for enhancing medication adherence and safety. More emphasis should be given to the design of medication management features in diabetes apps to improve their alignment to evidence-based best practice. Show less
Lum, E.; Jimenez, G.; Huang, Z.L.; Thai, L.; Semwal, M.; Boehm, B.O.; Car, J. 2019
Objective To provide an overview of the current state of research of advance care planning (ACP), highlighting most studied topics, publication time, quality of studies and reported outcomes, and... Show moreObjective To provide an overview of the current state of research of advance care planning (ACP), highlighting most studied topics, publication time, quality of studies and reported outcomes, and to identify gaps to improve ACP receptivity, utilization, implementation, and outcomes. Method Cochrane methodology for conducting overviews of systematic reviews. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews tool. The following databases were searched from inception to April 2017: MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. Searches were supplemented with gray literature and manual searches. Result Eighty systematic reviews, covering 1,662 single articles, show that ACP-related research focuses on nine main topics: (1) ACP as part of end-of-life or palliative care interventions, (2) care decision-making; (3) communication strategies; (4) factors influencing ACP implementation; (5) ACP for specific patient groups, (6) ACP effectiveness; (7) ACP experiences; (8) ACP cost; and (9) ACP outcome measures. The majority of this research was published since 2014, its quality ranges from moderate to low, and reports on documentation, concordance, preferences, and resource utilization outcomes.Significance of results. Despite the surge of ACP research, there are major knowledge gaps about ACP initiation, timeliness, optimal content, and impact because of the low quality and fragmentation of the available evidence. Research has mostly focused on discrete aspects within ACP instead of using a holistic evaluative approach that takes into account its intricate working mechanisms, the effects of systems and contexts, and the impacts on multilevel stakeholders. Higher quality studies and innovative interventions are needed to develop effective ACP programs and address research gaps. Show less
Background: The availability of smartphone health apps empowers people to manage their own health. Currently, there are over 300,000 health apps available in the market targeting a variety of user... Show moreBackground: The availability of smartphone health apps empowers people to manage their own health. Currently, there are over 300,000 health apps available in the market targeting a variety of user needs from weight loss to management of chronic conditions, with diabetes being the most commonly targeted condition. To date, health apps largely fall outside government regulation, and there are no official guidelines to help clinicians and patients in app selection. Patients commonly resort to the internet for suggestions on which diabetes app to use.Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate apps identified through a Google search and characterize these apps in terms of features that support diabetes management.Methods: We performed a Google search for the "best diabetes apps 2017" and explored the first 4 search results. We identified and compiled a list of the apps recommended in the returned search results, which were Web articles. Information about each app was extracted from the papers and corresponding app store descriptions. We examined the apps for the following diabetes management features: medication management, blood glucose self-management, physical activity, diet and nutrition, and weight management.Results: Overall, 26 apps were recommended in 4 papers. One app was listed in all 4 papers, and 3 apps appeared on 3 of the 4 lists. Apart from one paper, there were no explicit criteria to justify or explain the selection of apps. We found a wide variation in the type and the number of diabetes management features in the recommended apps. Five apps required payment to be used. Two-thirds of the apps had blood glucose management features, and less than half had medication management features. The most prevalent app features were nutrition or diet-related (19/24, 79%) and physical activity tracking (14/24, 58%).Conclusions: The ambiguity of app selection and the wide variability in key features of the apps recommended for diabetes management may pose difficulties for patients when selecting the most appropriate app. It is critical to involve patients, clinicians, relevant professional bodies, and policy makers to define the key features an app should have for it to be classified as a "diabetes management" app. The lessons learned here may be extrapolated for the development and recommendation of apps for the management of other chronic conditions. Show less
Background. Advance care planning (ACP) involves important decision making about future medical needs. The high-volume and disparate nature of ACP research makes it difficult to grasp the evidence... Show moreBackground. Advance care planning (ACP) involves important decision making about future medical needs. The high-volume and disparate nature of ACP research makes it difficult to grasp the evidence and derive clear policy lessons for policymakers and clinicians.Aim. The aim of this study was to synthesize ACP research evidence and identify relevant contextual elements, program features, implementation principles, and impacted outcomes to inform policy and practice.Design. An overview of systematic reviews using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions was performed. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Reviews) tool.Data Sources. MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched for ACP-related research from inception of each database to April 2017. Searches were supplemented with gray literature and manual searches. Eighty systematic reviews, covering over 1660 original articles, were included in the analysis.Results. Legislations, institutional policies, and cultural factors influence ACP development. Positive perceptions toward ACP do not necessarily translate into more end-of-life conversations. Many factors related to patients' and providers' attitudes, and perceptions toward life and mortality influence ACP implementation, decision making, and completion. Limited, low-quality evidence points to several ACP benefits, such as improved end-of-life communication, documentation of care preferences, dying in preferred place, and health care savings. Recurring features that make ACP programs effective include repeated and interactive discussion sessions, decision aids, and interventions targeting multiple stakeholders.Conclusions. Preliminary evidence highlights several elements that influence the ACP process and provides a variety of features that could support successful, effective, and sustainable ACP implementation. However, this evidence is compartmentalized and limited. Further studies evaluating ACP as a unified program and assessing the impact of ACP for different populations, settings, and contexts are needed to develop programs that are able to unleash ACP's full potential. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync-nd/4.0/). Show less
