Ethics in Telehealth: Comparison between Guidelines and Practice-based Experience -the Case for Learning Health Systems.
Journal
Yearbook of medical informatics
ISSN: 2364-0502
Titre abrégé: Yearb Med Inform
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9312666
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
18
4
2020
medline:
17
4
2021
entrez:
18
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To understand ethical issues within the tele-health domain, specifically how well established macro level telehealth guidelines map with micro level practitioner perspectives. 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. 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. 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32303097
doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1701976
pmc: PMC7442533
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
44-50Informations de copyright
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
Yearb Med Inform. 2015 Aug 13;10(1):137-47
pubmed: 26293861
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Nov 1;25(11):1579-1582
pubmed: 30329055
BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Mar;28(3):238-241
pubmed: 30291179
Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):163-169
pubmed: 27830246
Gerontology. 2016;62(2):226-37
pubmed: 26044243
Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):41-46
pubmed: 27830229
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):e258-68
pubmed: 22455718
Australas J Ageing. 2011 Sep;30(3):136-42
pubmed: 21923707
J Patient Exp. 2018 Dec;5(4):314-319
pubmed: 30574554
Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):53-60
pubmed: 27830231
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Oct;94:112-6
pubmed: 27573318
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Jun 06;6(6):e10741
pubmed: 29875083
Int J Med Inform. 2014 Sep;83(9):624-35
pubmed: 24996581
Healthc Inform Res. 2015 Jul;21(3):152-60
pubmed: 26279951
Gerontologist. 2012 Jun;52(3):357-66
pubmed: 21983126
J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Oct;32(10):1136-1140
pubmed: 28653233
Int J Med Inform. 2015 Nov;84(11):892-900
pubmed: 26250987
Yearb Med Inform. 2018 Aug;27(1):48-54
pubmed: 29681043