Digital Facilitation to Support Patient Access to Web-Based Primary Care Services: Scoping Literature Review.


Journal

Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 07 2022
Historique:
received: 29 09 2021
accepted: 10 04 2022
revised: 15 02 2022
entrez: 14 7 2022
pubmed: 15 7 2022
medline: 19 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The use of web-based services within primary care (PC) in the National Health Service in England is increasing, with medically underserved populations being less likely to engage with web-based services than other patient groups. Digital facilitation-referring to a range of processes, procedures, and personnel that seek to support patients in the uptake and use of web-based services-may be a way of addressing these challenges. However, the models and impact of digital facilitation currently in use are unclear. This study aimed to identify, characterize, and differentiate between different approaches to digital facilitation in PC; establish what is known about the effectiveness of different approaches; and understand the enablers of digital facilitation. Adopting scoping review methodology, we searched academic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and gray literature published between 2015 and 2020. We conducted snowball searches of reference lists of included articles and articles identified during screening as relevant to digital facilitation, but which did not meet the inclusion criteria because of article type restrictions. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Data from eligible studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis approach. A total of 85 publications were included. Most (71/85, 84%) were concerned with digital facilitation approaches targeted at patients (promotion of services, training patients to improve their technical skills, or other guidance and support). Further identified approaches targeted PC staff to help patients (eg, improving staff knowledge of web-based services and enhancing their technical or communication skills). Qualitative evidence suggests that some digital facilitation may be effective in promoting the uptake and use of web-based services by patients (eg, recommendation of web-based services by practice staff and coaching). We found little evidence that providing patients with initial assistance in registering for or accessing web-based services leads to increased long-term use. Few studies have addressed the effects of digital facilitation on health care inequalities. Those that addressed this suggested that providing technical training for patients could be effective, at least in part, in reducing inequalities, although not entirely. Factors affecting the success of digital facilitation include perceptions of the usefulness of the web-based service, trust in the service, patients' trust in providers, the capacity of PC staff, guidelines or regulations supporting facilitation efforts, and staff buy-in and motivation. Digital facilitation has the potential to increase the uptake and use of web-based services by PC patients. Understanding the approaches that are most effective and cost-effective, for whom, and under what circumstances requires further research, including rigorous evaluations of longer-term impacts. As efforts continue to increase the use of web-based services in PC in England and elsewhere, we offer an early typology to inform conceptual development and evaluations. PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020189019; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189019.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The use of web-based services within primary care (PC) in the National Health Service in England is increasing, with medically underserved populations being less likely to engage with web-based services than other patient groups. Digital facilitation-referring to a range of processes, procedures, and personnel that seek to support patients in the uptake and use of web-based services-may be a way of addressing these challenges. However, the models and impact of digital facilitation currently in use are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to identify, characterize, and differentiate between different approaches to digital facilitation in PC; establish what is known about the effectiveness of different approaches; and understand the enablers of digital facilitation.
METHODS
Adopting scoping review methodology, we searched academic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and gray literature published between 2015 and 2020. We conducted snowball searches of reference lists of included articles and articles identified during screening as relevant to digital facilitation, but which did not meet the inclusion criteria because of article type restrictions. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Data from eligible studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis approach.
RESULTS
A total of 85 publications were included. Most (71/85, 84%) were concerned with digital facilitation approaches targeted at patients (promotion of services, training patients to improve their technical skills, or other guidance and support). Further identified approaches targeted PC staff to help patients (eg, improving staff knowledge of web-based services and enhancing their technical or communication skills). Qualitative evidence suggests that some digital facilitation may be effective in promoting the uptake and use of web-based services by patients (eg, recommendation of web-based services by practice staff and coaching). We found little evidence that providing patients with initial assistance in registering for or accessing web-based services leads to increased long-term use. Few studies have addressed the effects of digital facilitation on health care inequalities. Those that addressed this suggested that providing technical training for patients could be effective, at least in part, in reducing inequalities, although not entirely. Factors affecting the success of digital facilitation include perceptions of the usefulness of the web-based service, trust in the service, patients' trust in providers, the capacity of PC staff, guidelines or regulations supporting facilitation efforts, and staff buy-in and motivation.
CONCLUSIONS
Digital facilitation has the potential to increase the uptake and use of web-based services by PC patients. Understanding the approaches that are most effective and cost-effective, for whom, and under what circumstances requires further research, including rigorous evaluations of longer-term impacts. As efforts continue to increase the use of web-based services in PC in England and elsewhere, we offer an early typology to inform conceptual development and evaluations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020189019; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189019.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35834301
pii: v24i7e33911
doi: 10.2196/33911
pmc: PMC9335178
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e33911

Informations de copyright

©Brandi Leach, Sarah Parkinson, Evangelos Gkousis, Gary Abel, Helen Atherton, John Campbell, Christopher Clark, Emma Cockcroft, Christine Marriott, Emma Pitchforth, Jon Sussex. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 14.07.2022.

Références

J Med Internet Res. 2018 Aug 21;20(8):e244
pubmed: 30131313
J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 31;19(5):e185
pubmed: 28566268
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2019 Sep;144(3):846-853.e11
pubmed: 31181221
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Oct 03;18(10):e263
pubmed: 27697748
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 12;12(7):e0180867
pubmed: 28704442
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Aug 18;17(8):e201
pubmed: 26286257
BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Jan 21;14:14
pubmed: 24443820
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jun 23;17(6):e148
pubmed: 26104044
Yearb Med Inform. 2018 Aug;27(1):146-155
pubmed: 30157518
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Dec 03;17(12):e275
pubmed: 26681155
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 27;20(3):e105
pubmed: 29588269
BMJ. 2019 Jun 5;365:l2387
pubmed: 31167923
Aust J Prim Health. 2019 Nov 13;:
pubmed: 31718769
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Aug 29;69(686):e586-e594
pubmed: 31160368
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Mar 11;21(3):e11386
pubmed: 30855234
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Aug 8;266:162-167
pubmed: 31397318
Arch Intern Med. 2011 Mar 28;171(6):568-74
pubmed: 21444847
J Adolesc Health. 2018 Jan;62(1):29-35
pubmed: 29169768
BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 24;11(3):e046857
pubmed: 33762248
Lancet. 2016 Jun 4;387(10035):2323-2330
pubmed: 27059888
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Aug 16;19(8):e291
pubmed: 28814380
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Oct 2;157(7):461-70
pubmed: 23027317
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017 Oct 13;114(41):681-688
pubmed: 29082858
BJGP Open. 2021 Aug 24;5(4):
pubmed: 33910917
JMIR Res Protoc. 2015 Oct 19;4(4):e116
pubmed: 26481906
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Feb 8;23(2):e26433
pubmed: 33465037
Calif J Health Promot. 2017 Aug;15(2):1-12
pubmed: 30393470
BMC Fam Pract. 2015 Jan 22;16:3
pubmed: 25608851
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Oct 24;16(10):e241
pubmed: 25344621
J Am Board Fam Med. 2019 Mar-Apr;32(2):248-258
pubmed: 30850461
BMC Obes. 2018 Feb 12;5:7
pubmed: 29449953
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Jun 21;19(1):94
pubmed: 29929483
Health Commun. 2019 Oct;34(11):1320-1328
pubmed: 29889560
JMIR Ment Health. 2019 Jan 25;6(1):e11334
pubmed: 30681968
Diabetes Care. 2010 Nov;33(11):2314-9
pubmed: 20739686
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Jul;69(684):326-327
pubmed: 31249071
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Sep 30;13(3):e71
pubmed: 21959968
Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Mar;65(632):e141-51
pubmed: 25733435
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):141-6
pubmed: 26134548
QJM. 2020 Mar 1;113(3):163-172
pubmed: 31545374
J Med Internet Res. 2021 May 27;23(5):e28629
pubmed: 33970867
J Am Board Fam Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;25(5):676-85
pubmed: 22956703
J Diabetes Res. 2020 Jan 8;2020:5013142
pubmed: 32016122
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Apr 24;6(4):e105
pubmed: 29691209
J Am Board Fam Med. 2016 Sep-Oct;29(5):581-91
pubmed: 27613791
Fam Pract. 2019 Mar 20;36(2):214-218
pubmed: 29873708
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 15;8(2):e018688
pubmed: 29449293
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 Nov-Dec;20(6):1128-31
pubmed: 23676243
Digit Health. 2016 Nov 21;2:2055207616675559
pubmed: 29942570
J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2020 Dec;27(4):766-782
pubmed: 31630347
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Nov 29;19(1):185
pubmed: 30497414
J Pediatr Health Care. 2017 May - Jun;31(3):350-361
pubmed: 28012799
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jan 11;20(1):e9
pubmed: 29326097
J Med Internet Res. 2010 Dec 17;12(4):e71
pubmed: 21169160
JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2018 Dec 10;1(2):e11080
pubmed: 31518297
Br J Gen Pract. 2021 Feb 25;71(704):e166-e177
pubmed: 33558332
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Jun 1;8(6):e16497
pubmed: 32478660
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011 May;165(5):405-11
pubmed: 21536954
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jun 29;18(6):e146
pubmed: 27357528
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Sep;23(5):951-5
pubmed: 26911830
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016 Sep 29;16(1):126
pubmed: 27687632
J Med Internet Res. 2012 May 08;14(3):e70
pubmed: 22564332
JMIR Ment Health. 2015 Mar 23;2(1):e6
pubmed: 26543912
Lancet Digit Health. 2021 Jun;3(6):e383-e396
pubmed: 33967002
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Jun 21;6(6):e10701
pubmed: 29929948
BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 21;8(1):e019683
pubmed: 29358447
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 May 02;15(5):
pubmed: 29724040
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2010;160(Pt 1):13-7
pubmed: 20841641
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Aug 19;21(8):e13382
pubmed: 31429419
J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Dec;33(12):2085-2091
pubmed: 30187376
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019 Mar;37(1):60-68
pubmed: 30700191
Hum Fertil (Camb). 2015;18(4):238-47
pubmed: 26167659
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014 Jul;105(1):30-9
pubmed: 24862240
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2017 May;45(3):253-265
pubmed: 28325175
J Affect Disord. 2015 May 1;176:9-17
pubmed: 25682378
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Feb 1;26(2):115-123
pubmed: 30534990
JMIR Med Inform. 2017 Jul 04;5(3):e13
pubmed: 28676467
Rand Health Q. 2018 Mar 30;7(4):1
pubmed: 30083413
Health Technol Assess. 2015 Dec;19(101):viii, xxi-171
pubmed: 26685904
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Nov 01;19(11):e367
pubmed: 29092808
JMIR Med Inform. 2018 Apr 18;6(2):e25
pubmed: 29669705
Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):376-84
pubmed: 23381531
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Feb 7;22(2):e16144
pubmed: 32031538
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Aug 1;26(8-9):855-870
pubmed: 30958532
Telemed J E Health. 2013 Oct;19(10):739-45
pubmed: 23952787
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jun 30;18(6):e163
pubmed: 27363434
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016 Jan-Feb;38:94-8
pubmed: 26589765
PLoS Med. 2020 Feb 18;17(2):e1003029
pubmed: 32069288
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015 Sep 14;3(3):e87
pubmed: 26369346
BMJ. 2016 Feb 17;352:i942
pubmed: 26887896
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Feb;67(655):e138-e147
pubmed: 28093422
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 Dec;18 Suppl 1:i24-7
pubmed: 21976028
BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c5814
pubmed: 21081595
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Apr;68(669):e293-e300
pubmed: 29378697

Auteurs

Brandi Leach (B)

RAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Sarah Parkinson (S)

RAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Evangelos Gkousis (E)

RAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Gary Abel (G)

University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Helen Atherton (H)

University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.

John Campbell (J)

University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Christopher Clark (C)

University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Emma Cockcroft (E)

University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Christine Marriott (C)

National Institute of Health and Care Research Collaboration South West Peninsula Patient Engagement Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Emma Pitchforth (E)

University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Jon Sussex (J)

RAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH