Feeling safe in the context of digitalization in healthcare: a scoping review.
Digitalization
Emotional safety
Healthcare
Patient Safety
Psychological safety
Telemedicine
eHealth
Journal
Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Feb 2024
08 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
16
10
2023
accepted:
16
01
2024
medline:
9
2
2024
pubmed:
9
2
2024
entrez:
8
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Digitalization in healthcare and society can be challenging, particularly for people who have limited digital experiences. New digital technologies can influence individuals' perceived safety and well-being. In this study, we aimed to identify and analyze the literature on needs and influencing factors in the context of emotional and psychological safety and digitalization in healthcare. A scoping review was conducted based on the PRISMA-ScR standard. The literature was searched based on the databases Medline via PubMed, PsycINFO via Ovid, and CINAHL via EBSCO. Literature was included after a review of the titles, abstracts, and full texts published in English or German in the last 5 years (October 2017-September 2022). Eligible literature included definitions and descriptions of emotional and/or psychological safety and was related to digitalization in healthcare and was analyzed qualitatively via inductive content analysis. The findings were analyzed from ethical, psychosocial, legal, economic, and political perspectives. A total of 32 publications were finally included thereof qualitative (n = 20), quantitative (n = 3), and mixed methods (n = 2) studies. Other included publications were systematic integrative reviews, scoping reviews, narrative reviews, white papers, and ethical statements. Of these publications, four qualitative studies focused on emotional or psychological safety in the context of digital technology use in healthcare as a primary research aim. Most literature has shown that perceived safety is influenced by perceived changes in healthcare, digital (health) literacy, the design of digital technology, and need orientation. The needs identified in this context overlap strongly with the influencing factors. A low or high perceived safety has an impact on users' thoughts and actions. The importance of emotional safety in the context of digital technologies in healthcare is growing, while psychological safety seems to be underrepresented. The interaction between the influencing factors and the need to feel safe leads to considerations that can affect user behavior and have far-reaching outcomes for the implementation of digital technology in healthcare. Open Science Framework Registries on 16 December 2022 https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HVYPT .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Digitalization in healthcare and society can be challenging, particularly for people who have limited digital experiences. New digital technologies can influence individuals' perceived safety and well-being. In this study, we aimed to identify and analyze the literature on needs and influencing factors in the context of emotional and psychological safety and digitalization in healthcare.
METHODS
METHODS
A scoping review was conducted based on the PRISMA-ScR standard. The literature was searched based on the databases Medline via PubMed, PsycINFO via Ovid, and CINAHL via EBSCO. Literature was included after a review of the titles, abstracts, and full texts published in English or German in the last 5 years (October 2017-September 2022). Eligible literature included definitions and descriptions of emotional and/or psychological safety and was related to digitalization in healthcare and was analyzed qualitatively via inductive content analysis. The findings were analyzed from ethical, psychosocial, legal, economic, and political perspectives.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 32 publications were finally included thereof qualitative (n = 20), quantitative (n = 3), and mixed methods (n = 2) studies. Other included publications were systematic integrative reviews, scoping reviews, narrative reviews, white papers, and ethical statements. Of these publications, four qualitative studies focused on emotional or psychological safety in the context of digital technology use in healthcare as a primary research aim. Most literature has shown that perceived safety is influenced by perceived changes in healthcare, digital (health) literacy, the design of digital technology, and need orientation. The needs identified in this context overlap strongly with the influencing factors. A low or high perceived safety has an impact on users' thoughts and actions.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The importance of emotional safety in the context of digital technologies in healthcare is growing, while psychological safety seems to be underrepresented. The interaction between the influencing factors and the need to feel safe leads to considerations that can affect user behavior and have far-reaching outcomes for the implementation of digital technology in healthcare.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Open Science Framework Registries on 16 December 2022 https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HVYPT .
Identifiants
pubmed: 38331923
doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02465-9
pii: 10.1186/s13643-024-02465-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
62Subventions
Organisme : Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
ID : 16INS108
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Iyamu I, Xu AXT, Gómez-Ramírez O, Ablona A, Chang HJ, Mckee G, et al. Defining digital public health and the role of digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation: scoping review. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021;7(11):e30399.
Nakrem S, Solbjør M, Pettersen IN, Kleiven HH. Care relationships at stake? Home healthcare professionals’ experiences with digital medicine dispensers - A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):1–10.
Nyholm L, Santamäki-Fischer R, Fagerström L. Users’ ambivalent sense of security with humanoid robots in healthcare. Inform Health Soc Care. 2021;46(2):218–26.
Okhrimenko I, Sovik I, Pyankova S, Lukyanova A. Digital transformation of the socioeconomic system: Prospects for digitalization in society. Espacios. 2019;40(38):26–34.
Lyndon A, Davis D-A, Sharma AE, Scott KA. Emotional safety is patient safety. BMJ Qual Saf. 2023;0:1–4.
Åkerlind C, Martin L, Gustafsson C. eHomecare and safety: The experiences of older patients and their relatives. Geriatr Nurs (Minneap). 2018;39(2):178–85.
Widberg C, Wiklund B, Klarare A. Patients’ experiences of eHealth in palliative care: an integrative review. BMC Palliat Care. 2020;19(1):1–14.
Landers C, Vayena E, Amann J, Blasimme A. Stuck in translation: Stakeholder perspectives on impediments to responsible digital health. Front Digit Health. 2023;5:1069410.
Raja M, Uhrenfeldt L, Galvin KT, Kymre IG. Older adults` sense of dignity in digitally led healthcare. Nurs Ethics. 2022;29(6):1518–29.
Cummins N, Schuller BW. Five Crucial Challenges in Digital Health. Front Digit Health. 2020;2:536203.
Akalin N, Kristoffersson A, Loutfi A. Do you feel safe with your robot? Factors influencing perceived safety in human-robot interaction based on subjective and objective measures. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2022;158:102744.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102744
Strand AS, Johnsson B, Hena M, Magnusson B, Hallström IK. Developing eHealth in neonatal care to enhance parents’ self-management. Scand J Caring Sci. 2022;36(4):969–77.
Maslow AH. A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev. 1943;50(4):370–96.
Fagerström L, Gustafson Y, Jakobsson G, Johansson S, Vartiainen P. Sense of security among people aged 65 and 75: External and inner sources of security. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67(6):1305–16.
Lang A, Edwards N, Fleiszer A. Safety in home care: A broadened perspective of patient safety. Int J Qual Health Care. 2008;20(2):130–5.
Kuske S, Borgmann SO, Wolf F, Bleck C. Emotional Safety in the Context of Dementia: A Multiperspective Qualitative Study. J Alzheimer’s Dis. 2021;79(1):355–75.
Bartneck C, Kulić D, Croft E, Zoghbi S. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int J Soc Robot. 2009;1(1):71–81.
Hoaas H, Andreassen HK, Lien LA, Hjalmarsen A, Zanaboni P. Adherence and factors affecting satisfaction in long-term telerehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A mixed methods study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16(26):1–14.
O’Donovan R, McAuliffe E. Exploring psychological safety in healthcare teams to inform the development of interventions: Combining observational, survey and interview data. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):1–16.
Grailey KE, Murray E, Reader T, Brett SJ. The presence and potential impact of psychological safety in the healthcare setting: an evidence synthesis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):1–15.
Edmondson AC, Lei Z. Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav. 2014;1(1):23–43.
Frazier ML, Fainshmidt S, Klinger RL, Pezeshkan A, Vracheva V. Psychological Safety: A Meta-Analytic Review and Extension. Pers Psychol. 2017;70(1):113–65.
Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis JJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: An overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):1–13.
Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Mental Health Mental Health Serv Res. 2011;38(2):65–76.
Hajiheydari N, Delgosha MS, Olya H. Scepticism and resistance to IoMT in healthcare: Application of behavioural reasoning theory with configurational perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2021;169:120807.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann of Inter Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.
Adams RJ, Smart P, Huff AS. Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. Int J Manag Rev. 2017;19(4):432–54.
Noyes J, Booth A, Cargo M, Flemming K, Harden A, Harris J, et al. Chapter 21: Qualitative evidence. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page K, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane; 2022. Available from https://www.training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-21 . Accessed 8 July 2023.
Peters M, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Trico A, Khalil H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12 . Accessed 8 July 2023.
Aromataris, E, Munn Z. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI. 2020. Available from https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01 . Accessed 23 Aug 2022.
McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021
pubmed: 27005575
Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52(5):546–53.
Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications; 2018.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J of surg 2021;88:105906.
Bajaj K, Madad SS, Birnbaum A, Pohlman J, Cruz JR, Walker K, et al. Challenges to Implementation of an Incognito Embedded Patient Simulation Program to Improve System-Wide Public Health Threat Preparedness. Int J Women’s Health Care. 2017;2(2):1–4.
Bhattacharya A, Nagar R, Jenness J, Munson SA, Kientz JA. Designing asynchronous remote support for behavioral activation in teenagers with depression: Formative study. JMIR Form Res. 2021;5(7):e20969.
Demiris G, Lin SY, Turner AM. The role of personal health information management in promoting patient safety in the home: A qualitative analysis. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;264:1159–63.
Dixon S, Frost L, Feder G, Ziebland S, Pope C. Challenges of safeguarding via remote consulting during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study. Br J Gen Pract. 2022;72(716):e199–208.
D’Onofrio G, Fiorini L, Hoshino H, Matsumori A, Okabe Y, Tsukamoto M, et al. Assistive robots for socialization in elderly people: results pertaining to the needs of the users. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019;31(9):1313–29.
Donovan LM, Mog AC, Blanchard KN, Magid KH, Syed AS, Kelley LR, et al. Patient experiences with telehealth in sleep medicine: A qualitative evaluation. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(8):1645–51.
Hylén M, Nilsson S, Kristensson-Hallström I, Kristjánsdóttir G, Stenström P, Vilhjálmsson R. Access to health care perceived by parents caring for their child at home supported by eHealth—a directed approach introducing aperture. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):1008.
James S, Ashley C, Williams A, Desborough J, McInnes S, Calma K, et al. Experiences of Australian primary healthcare nurses in using telehealth during COVID-19: A qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2021;11(8):e049095.
Johannessen TB. Patient safety and feeling of safety when telecare is used among home-dwelling older adults. A qualitative study. 2021.
Karlsen C, Moe CE, Haraldstad K, Thygesen E. Caring by telecare? A hermeneutic study of experiences among older adults and their family caregivers. J Clin Nurs. 2019;28(7-8):1300–13.
Lounsbury O, Roberts L, Goodman JR, Batey P, Naar L, Flott KM, et al. Opening a ’can of worms’ to explore the public’s hopes and fears about health care data sharing: Qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(2):e22744.
Lynch J, Hughes G, Papoutsi C, Wherton J, A’Court C. “It’s no good but at least I’ve always got it round my neck”: A postphenomenological analysis of reassurance in assistive technology use by older people. Soc Sci Med. 2022;292:114553.
Maier CA, Riger D, Morgan-Sowada H. “It’s splendid once you grow into it:” Client experiences of relational teletherapy in the era of COVID-19. J Marital Fam Ther. 2021;47(2):304–19.
Malmgren Fänge A, Carlsson G, Chiatti C, Lethin C. Using sensor-based technology for safety and independence – the experiences of people with dementia and their families. Scand J Caring Sci. 2019;34(3):648–57.
Winberg C, Kylberg M, Pettersson C, Harnett T, Hedvall PO, Mattsson T, et al. Feeling controlled or being in control? Apps for self-management among older people with neurological disability. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(6):603–8.
Doorley JD, Volgenau KM, Kelso KC, Kashdan TB, Shackman AJ. Do people with elevated social anxiety respond differently to digital and face-to-face communications? Two daily diary studies with null effects. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:859–65.
doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.069
pubmed: 32739703
pmcid: 7484355
Hughes AM, Sonesh SC, Mason RE, Gregory ME, Marttos A, Schulman CI, et al. Trauma, Teams, and Telemedicine: Evaluating Telemedicine and Teamwork in a Mass Casualty Simulation. Mil Med. 2021;186(7-8):e811–8.
Lang C, Voigt K, Neumann R, Bergmann A, Holthoff-Detto V. Adherence and acceptance of a home-based telemonitoring application used by multi-morbid patients aged 65 years and older. J Telemed Telecare. 2022;28(1):37–51.
Ninatti L, Piergiovanni L. Digital Transformation of the Treatment of Eating Disorders: Matching Digital Technologies and Professionals’ Psychological Determinants. 2019.
Rogerson L, Burr J, Tyson S. The feasibility and acceptability of smart home technology using the Howz system for people with stroke. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;15(2):148–52.
Kupfer A, Mayer M. Digitalisierung der Beratung. Onlineberatung für Kinder und Jugendliche und die Frage nach Möglichkeiten des Blended Counseling in der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe. Soziale Passagen. 2019;11(2):243–65.
Salvador Vergès À, Cusí Sánchez MV, Bossio Grigera P, Fàbrega Agulló C, Da Gomes Costa F, Serra Trullas A, et al. Determinants in Stakeholder Opinions about Telemedicine in Palliative Care: A Scoping Review. Telemed e-Health. 2022;28(7):932–41.
van Olmen J. The Promise of Digital Self-Management: A Reflection about the Effects of Patient-Targeted e-Health Tools on Self-Management and Wellbeing. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(3):1360.
Datenethikkommission der Bundesregierung. Gutachten der Datenethikkommission. 2019. Available from https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikationen/themen/it-digitalpolitik/gutachten-datenethikkommission.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=6 . Accessed 8 July 2023.
Deutscher Ethikrat. Robotik für gute Pflege - Stellungnahme. 2020. Available from https://www.ethikrat.org/fileadmin/Publikationen/Stellungnahmen/deutsch/stellungnahme-robotik-fuer-gute-pflege.pdf . Accessed 8 July 2023.
Perry AF, Federico F, Huebner J. Telemedicine: Ensuring Safe, Equitable, Person-Centered Virtual Care. IHI White Paper. Boston: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2021. Available from https://www.ihi.org .
van Hoof J, Dikken J, van Staalduinen WH, van der Pas S, van den Hoven RFM, Hulsebosch-Janssen LMT. Towards a Better Understanding of the Sense of Safety and Security of Community-Dwelling Older Adults. The Case of the Age-Friendly City of The Hague. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(7):3960.
Zhou S, Ni Z, Ogihara A, Wang X. Behavioral Patterns of Supply and Demand Sides of Health Services for the Elderly in Sustainable Digital Transformation: A Mixed Methods Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(13):8221.
Pfadenhauer LM. Conceptualizing Context and Intervention as a System in Implementation Science: Learning From Complexity Theory Comment on “Stakeholder Perspectives of Attributes and Features of Context Relevant to Knowledge Translation in Health Settings: A Multi-country Analysis.” Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(8):1570–3.
Lewis CC, Klasnja P, Lyon AR, Powell BJ, Lengnick-Hall R, Buchanan G, et al. The mechanics of implementation strategies and measures: advancing the study of implementation mechanisms. Implement Sci Commun. 2022;3(1):114.
Raimo N, De Turi I, Albergo F, Vitolla F. The drivers of the digital transformation in the healthcare industry: An empirical analysis in Italian hospitals. Technovation. 2023;121:102558.