The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview

eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS Medicine (Impact Factor: 14.43). 01/2011; 8(1):e1000387. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000387
Source: PubMed


There is considerable international interest in exploiting the potential of digital solutions to enhance the quality and safety of health care. Implementations of transformative eHealth technologies are underway globally, often at very considerable cost. In order to assess the impact of eHealth solutions on the quality and safety of health care, and to inform policy decisions on eHealth deployments, we undertook a systematic review of systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness and consequences of various eHealth technologies on the quality and safety of care.
We developed novel search strategies, conceptual maps of health care quality, safety, and eHealth interventions, and then systematically identified, scrutinised, and synthesised the systematic review literature. Major biomedical databases were searched to identify systematic reviews published between 1997 and 2010. Related theoretical, methodological, and technical material was also reviewed. We identified 53 systematic reviews that focused on assessing the impact of eHealth interventions on the quality and/or safety of health care and 55 supplementary systematic reviews providing relevant supportive information. This systematic review literature was found to be generally of substandard quality with regards to methodology, reporting, and utility. We thematically categorised eHealth technologies into three main areas: (1) storing, managing, and transmission of data; (2) clinical decision support; and (3) facilitating care from a distance. We found that despite support from policymakers, there was relatively little empirical evidence to substantiate many of the claims made in relation to these technologies. Whether the success of those relatively few solutions identified to improve quality and safety would continue if these were deployed beyond the contexts in which they were originally developed, has yet to be established. Importantly, best practice guidelines in effective development and deployment strategies are lacking.
There is a large gap between the postulated and empirically demonstrated benefits of eHealth technologies. In addition, there is a lack of robust research on the risks of implementing these technologies and their cost-effectiveness has yet to be demonstrated, despite being frequently promoted by policymakers and "techno-enthusiasts" as if this was a given. In the light of the paucity of evidence in relation to improvements in patient outcomes, as well as the lack of evidence on their cost-effectiveness, it is vital that future eHealth technologies are evaluated against a comprehensive set of measures, ideally throughout all stages of the technology's life cycle. Such evaluation should be characterised by careful attention to socio-technical factors to maximise the likelihood of successful implementation and adoption.

122 Reads
  • Source
    • "A review of the literature reveals that mHealth initiatives in developing countries range from disease surveillance and control, emergency response systems, human resource coordination, management and supervision , m-learning to health services monitoring and reporting (Mechael, 2010). Yet, the impact of mHealth has yet to be fully realised (Black et al., 2011; Payton et al., 2011), primarily in LMIC (Avergou, 2008; Varshney 2011) and more specifically in the area of Wearable Vital Sign Sensor systems (Yetisen, 2014). "
    • "Electronic prescription technologies are used in different ways. By definition, eRx refers to any computerized system used to enter, modify, review and communicate information on medication prescriptions [4]. The technology may be used on its own or linked to an electronic health record. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to identify physicians' and pharmacists' perceptions of the challenges and benefits to implementing a nationwide electronic prescribing network linking medical clinics and community pharmacies in Quebec, Canada. Forty-nine people (12 general practitioners, 2 managers, 33 community pharmacists, and 2 pharmacy staff members) from 40 points of care (10 primary care clinics (42% of all the connected sites) and 30 community pharmacies (44%)) were interviewed in 2013. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. A low level of network use was observed. Most pharmacists processed e-prescriptions by manual entry instead of importing electronically. They reported concerns about potential errors generated by importing e-prescriptions, mainly due to the instruction field. Paper prescriptions were still perceived as the best means for safe and effective processing of prescriptions in pharmacies. Speed issues when validating e-prescription messages were seen as an irritant by physicians, and resulted in several of them abandoning transmission. Displaying the medications based on the dispensing data was identified as the main obstacle to meaningful use of medication histories. Numerous challenges impeded realization of the benefits of this network. Standards for e-prescription messages, as well as rules for message validation, need to be improved to increase the potential benefits of e-prescriptions. Standard drug terminology including the concept of clinical medication should be developed, and the implementation of rules in local applications to allow for the classification and reconciliation of medication lists from dispensing data should be made a priority. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email:
    Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 04/2015; 22(4). DOI:10.1093/jamia/ocv026 · 3.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Computer-based physical activity interventions may be an effective way to provide physical activity counselling without increasing the time demands on primary care providers (Marcus et al., 2009). Although computer-based counselling may be feasible , the circumstances of use with respect to the target group and its integration into the care process have to be clarified during the development of new technology (Becker et al., 2011; Black et al., 2011). Therefore, it is recommended to develop technology in a user-centred way and to collect user requirements by composing use cases (Jacobson, 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The systematic development of a counselling protocol in primary care combined with a monitoring and feedback tool to support chronically ill patients to achieve a more active lifestyle. An iterative user-centred design method was used to develop a counselling protocol: the Self-management Support Programme (SSP). The needs and preferences of future users of this protocol were identified by analysing the literature, through qualitative research, and by consulting an expert panel. The counselling protocol is based on the Five A's model. Practice nurses apply motivational interviewing, risk communication and goal setting to support self-management of patients in planning how to achieve a more active lifestyle. The protocol consists of a limited number of behaviour change consultations intertwined with interaction with and responses from the It's LiFe! monitoring and feedback tool. This tool provides feedback on patients' physical activity levels via an app on their smartphone. A summary of these levels is automatically sent to the general practice so that practice nurses can respond to this information. A SSP to stimulate physical activity was defined based on user requirements of care providers and patients, followed by a review by a panel of experts. By following this user-centred approach, the organization of care was carefully taken into account, which has led to a practical and affordable protocol for physical activity counselling combined with mobile technology. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email:
    Health Promotion International 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/heapro/dau107 · 1.94 Impact Factor
Show more