A systematic review of clinician and staff views on the acceptability of incorporating remote monitoring technology into primary care

Melinda Davis, Michele Freeman, Jeffrey Kaye, Nancy Vuckovic, David Buckley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Remote monitoring technology (RMT) may enhance healthcare quality and reduce costs. RMT adoption depends on perceptions of the end-user (e.g., patients, caregivers, healthcare providers). We conducted a systematic review exploring the acceptability and feasibility of RMT use in routine adult patient care, from the perspectives of primary care clinicians, administrators, and clinic staff.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the databases of Medline, IEEE Xplore, and Compendex for original articles published from January 1996 through February 2013. We manually screened bibliographies of pertinent studies and consulted experts to identify English-language studies meeting our inclusion criteria.

RESULTS: Of 939 citations identified, 15 studies reported in 16 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were heterogeneous by country, type of RMT used, patient and provider characteristics, and method of implementation and evaluation. Clinicians, staff, and administrators generally held positive views about RMTs. Concerns emerged regarding clinical relevance of RMT data, changing clinical roles and patterns of care (e.g., reduced quality of care from fewer patient visits, overtreatment), insufficient staffing or time to monitor and discuss RMT data, data incompatibility with a clinic's electronic health record (EHR), and unclear legal liability regarding response protocols.

CONCLUSIONS: This small body of heterogeneous literature suggests that for RMTs to be adopted in primary care, researchers and developers must ensure clinical relevance, support adequate infrastructure, streamline data transmission into EHR systems, attend to changing care patterns and professional roles, and clarify response protocols. There is a critical need to engage end-users in the development and implementation of RMT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)428-438
Number of pages11
JournalTelemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association
Volume20
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2014

Fingerprint

Primary Health Care
Technology
Electronic Health Records
Quality of Health Care
Administrative Personnel
Professional Role
Legal Liability
Bibliography
Health Personnel
Caregivers
Publications
Patient Care
Language
Research Personnel
Databases
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{2cfe1d761ba94dd3ad076aadf619974c,
title = "A systematic review of clinician and staff views on the acceptability of incorporating remote monitoring technology into primary care",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Remote monitoring technology (RMT) may enhance healthcare quality and reduce costs. RMT adoption depends on perceptions of the end-user (e.g., patients, caregivers, healthcare providers). We conducted a systematic review exploring the acceptability and feasibility of RMT use in routine adult patient care, from the perspectives of primary care clinicians, administrators, and clinic staff.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the databases of Medline, IEEE Xplore, and Compendex for original articles published from January 1996 through February 2013. We manually screened bibliographies of pertinent studies and consulted experts to identify English-language studies meeting our inclusion criteria.RESULTS: Of 939 citations identified, 15 studies reported in 16 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were heterogeneous by country, type of RMT used, patient and provider characteristics, and method of implementation and evaluation. Clinicians, staff, and administrators generally held positive views about RMTs. Concerns emerged regarding clinical relevance of RMT data, changing clinical roles and patterns of care (e.g., reduced quality of care from fewer patient visits, overtreatment), insufficient staffing or time to monitor and discuss RMT data, data incompatibility with a clinic's electronic health record (EHR), and unclear legal liability regarding response protocols.CONCLUSIONS: This small body of heterogeneous literature suggests that for RMTs to be adopted in primary care, researchers and developers must ensure clinical relevance, support adequate infrastructure, streamline data transmission into EHR systems, attend to changing care patterns and professional roles, and clarify response protocols. There is a critical need to engage end-users in the development and implementation of RMT.",
author = "Melinda Davis and Michele Freeman and Jeffrey Kaye and Nancy Vuckovic and David Buckley",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/tmj.2013.0166",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "428--438",
journal = "Telemedicine and e-Health",
issn = "1530-5627",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of clinician and staff views on the acceptability of incorporating remote monitoring technology into primary care

AU - Davis, Melinda

AU - Freeman, Michele

AU - Kaye, Jeffrey

AU - Vuckovic, Nancy

AU - Buckley, David

PY - 2014/5/1

Y1 - 2014/5/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Remote monitoring technology (RMT) may enhance healthcare quality and reduce costs. RMT adoption depends on perceptions of the end-user (e.g., patients, caregivers, healthcare providers). We conducted a systematic review exploring the acceptability and feasibility of RMT use in routine adult patient care, from the perspectives of primary care clinicians, administrators, and clinic staff.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the databases of Medline, IEEE Xplore, and Compendex for original articles published from January 1996 through February 2013. We manually screened bibliographies of pertinent studies and consulted experts to identify English-language studies meeting our inclusion criteria.RESULTS: Of 939 citations identified, 15 studies reported in 16 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were heterogeneous by country, type of RMT used, patient and provider characteristics, and method of implementation and evaluation. Clinicians, staff, and administrators generally held positive views about RMTs. Concerns emerged regarding clinical relevance of RMT data, changing clinical roles and patterns of care (e.g., reduced quality of care from fewer patient visits, overtreatment), insufficient staffing or time to monitor and discuss RMT data, data incompatibility with a clinic's electronic health record (EHR), and unclear legal liability regarding response protocols.CONCLUSIONS: This small body of heterogeneous literature suggests that for RMTs to be adopted in primary care, researchers and developers must ensure clinical relevance, support adequate infrastructure, streamline data transmission into EHR systems, attend to changing care patterns and professional roles, and clarify response protocols. There is a critical need to engage end-users in the development and implementation of RMT.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Remote monitoring technology (RMT) may enhance healthcare quality and reduce costs. RMT adoption depends on perceptions of the end-user (e.g., patients, caregivers, healthcare providers). We conducted a systematic review exploring the acceptability and feasibility of RMT use in routine adult patient care, from the perspectives of primary care clinicians, administrators, and clinic staff.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched the databases of Medline, IEEE Xplore, and Compendex for original articles published from January 1996 through February 2013. We manually screened bibliographies of pertinent studies and consulted experts to identify English-language studies meeting our inclusion criteria.RESULTS: Of 939 citations identified, 15 studies reported in 16 publications met inclusion criteria. Studies were heterogeneous by country, type of RMT used, patient and provider characteristics, and method of implementation and evaluation. Clinicians, staff, and administrators generally held positive views about RMTs. Concerns emerged regarding clinical relevance of RMT data, changing clinical roles and patterns of care (e.g., reduced quality of care from fewer patient visits, overtreatment), insufficient staffing or time to monitor and discuss RMT data, data incompatibility with a clinic's electronic health record (EHR), and unclear legal liability regarding response protocols.CONCLUSIONS: This small body of heterogeneous literature suggests that for RMTs to be adopted in primary care, researchers and developers must ensure clinical relevance, support adequate infrastructure, streamline data transmission into EHR systems, attend to changing care patterns and professional roles, and clarify response protocols. There is a critical need to engage end-users in the development and implementation of RMT.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84961137353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84961137353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/tmj.2013.0166

DO - 10.1089/tmj.2013.0166

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 428

EP - 438

JO - Telemedicine and e-Health

JF - Telemedicine and e-Health

SN - 1530-5627

IS - 5

ER -