1
|
Bente BE, Van Dongen A, Verdaasdonk R, van Gemert-Pijnen L. eHealth implementation in Europe: a scoping review on legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects. Front Digit Health 2024; 6:1332707. [PMID: 38524249 PMCID: PMC10957613 DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2024.1332707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 03/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The evolution of eHealth development has shifted from standalone tools to comprehensive digital health environments, fostering data exchange among diverse stakeholders and systems. Nevertheless, existing research and implementation frameworks have primarily emphasized technological and organizational aspects of eHealth implementation, overlooking the intricate legal, ethical, and financial considerations. It is essential to discover what legal, ethical, financial, and technological challenges should be considered to ensure successful and sustainable implementation of eHealth. Objective This review aims to provide insights into barriers and facilitators of legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects for successful implementation of complex eHealth technologies, which impacts multiple levels and multiple stakeholders. Methods A scoping review was conducted by querying PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ACM Digital Library (2018-2023) for studies describing the implementation process of eHealth technologies that facilitate data exchange. Studies solely reporting clinical outcomes or conducted outside Europe were excluded. Two independent reviewers selected the studies. A conceptual framework was constructed through axial and inductive coding, extracting data from literature on legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects of eHealth implementation. This framework guided systematic extraction and interpretation. Results The search resulted in 7.308 studies that were screened for eligibility, of which 35 (0.48%) were included. Legal barriers revolve around data confidentiality and security, necessitating clear regulatory guidelines. Ethical barriers span consent, responsibility, liability, and validation complexities, necessitating robust frameworks. Financial barriers stem from inadequate funding, requiring (commercial) partnerships and business models. Technological issues include interoperability, integration, and malfunctioning, necessitating strategies for enhancing data reliability, improving accessibility, and aligning eHealth technology with existing systems for smoother integration. Conclusions This research highlights the multifaceted nature of eHealth implementation, encompassing legal, ethical, financial, and technological considerations. Collaborative stakeholder engagement is paramount for effective decision-making and aligns with the transition from standalone eHealth tools to integrated digital health environments. Identifying suitable stakeholders and recognizing their stakes and values enriches implementation strategies with expertise and guidance across all aspects. Future research should explore the timing of these considerations and practical solutions for regulatory compliance, funding, navigation of responsibility and liability, and business models for reimbursement strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Britt E. Bente
- Centre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Esnchede, Netherlands
| | - Anne Van Dongen
- Centre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Esnchede, Netherlands
| | - Ruud Verdaasdonk
- Section of Health, Technology and Implementation, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen
- Centre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Esnchede, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Behnke M, Valik JK, Gubbels S, Teixeira D, Kristensen B, Abbas M, van Rooden SM, Gastmeier P, van Mourik MSM. Information technology aspects of large-scale implementation of automated surveillance of healthcare-associated infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021; 27 Suppl 1:S29-S39. [PMID: 34217465 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.02.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2020] [Revised: 02/24/2021] [Accepted: 02/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) are a major public health concern. Monitoring of HAI rates, with feedback, is a core component of infection prevention and control programmes. Digitalization of healthcare data has created novel opportunities for automating the HAI surveillance process to varying degrees. However, methods are not standardized and vary widely between different healthcare facilities. Most current automated surveillance (AS) systems have been confined to local settings, and practical guidance on how to implement large-scale AS is needed. METHODS This document was written by a task force formed in March 2019 within the PRAISE network (Providing a Roadmap for Automated Infection Surveillance in Europe), gathering experts in HAI surveillance from ten European countries. RESULTS The document provides an overview of the key e-health aspects of implementing an AS system of HAI in a clinical environment to support both the infection prevention and control team and information technology (IT) departments. The focus is on understanding the basic principles of storage and structure of healthcare data, as well as the general organization of IT infrastructure in surveillance networks and participating healthcare facilities. The fundamentals of data standardization, interoperability and algorithms in relation to HAI surveillance are covered. Finally, technical aspects and practical examples of accessing, storing and sharing healthcare data within a HAI surveillance network, as well as maintenance and quality control of such a system, are discussed. CONCLUSIONS With the guidance given in this document, along with the PRAISE roadmap and governance documents, readers will find comprehensive support to implement large-scale AS in a surveillance network.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Behnke
- National Reference Center for Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany.
| | - John Karlsson Valik
- Department of Medicine Solna, Division of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Sophie Gubbels
- Data Integration and Analysis Secretariat, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Daniel Teixeira
- Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Brian Kristensen
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mohamed Abbas
- Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Stephanie M van Rooden
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Surveillance National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Petra Gastmeier
- National Reference Center for Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany
| | - Maaike S M van Mourik
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Mourik MSM, van Rooden SM, Abbas M, Aspevall O, Astagneau P, Bonten MJM, Carrara E, Gomila-Grange A, de Greeff SC, Gubbels S, Harrison W, Humphreys H, Johansson A, Koek MBG, Kristensen B, Lepape A, Lucet JC, Mookerjee S, Naucler P, Palacios-Baena ZR, Presterl E, Pujol M, Reilly J, Roberts C, Tacconelli E, Teixeira D, Tängdén T, Valik JK, Behnke M, Gastmeier P. PRAISE: providing a roadmap for automated infection surveillance in Europe. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021; 27 Suppl 1:S3-S19. [PMID: 34217466 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.02.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2020] [Revised: 02/24/2021] [Accepted: 02/27/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) are among the most common adverse events of medical care. Surveillance of HAI is a key component of successful infection prevention programmes. Conventional surveillance - manual chart review - is resource intensive and limited by concerns regarding interrater reliability. This has led to the development and use of automated surveillance (AS). Many AS systems are the product of in-house development efforts and heterogeneous in their design and methods. With this roadmap, the PRAISE network aims to provide guidance on how to move AS from the research setting to large-scale implementation, and how to ensure the delivery of surveillance data that are uniform and useful for improvement of quality of care. METHODS The PRAISE network brings together 30 experts from ten European countries. This roadmap is based on the outcome of two workshops, teleconference meetings and review by an independent panel of international experts. RESULTS This roadmap focuses on the surveillance of HAI within networks of healthcare facilities for the purpose of comparison, prevention and quality improvement initiatives. The roadmap does the following: discusses the selection of surveillance targets, different organizational and methodologic approaches and their advantages, disadvantages and risks; defines key performance requirements of AS systems and suggestions for their design; provides guidance on successful implementation and maintenance; and discusses areas of future research and training requirements for the infection prevention and related disciplines. The roadmap is supported by accompanying documents regarding the governance and information technology aspects of implementing AS. CONCLUSIONS Large-scale implementation of AS requires guidance and coordination within and across surveillance networks. Transitions to large-scale AS entail redevelopment of surveillance methods and their interpretation, intensive dialogue with stakeholders and the investment of considerable resources. This roadmap can be used to guide future steps towards implementation, including designing solutions for AS and practical guidance checklists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike S M van Mourik
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Stephanie M van Rooden
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Surveillance National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Mohamed Abbas
- Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Olov Aspevall
- Unit for Surveillance and Coordination, Public Health Agency of Sweden, Solna, Sweden
| | - Pascal Astagneau
- Centre for Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris & Faculty of Medicine, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Marc J M Bonten
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Elena Carrara
- Infectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, University of Verona, Italy
| | - Aina Gomila-Grange
- Infectious Diseases Unit, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Infectious Diseases Unit, Consorci Corporació Sanitària Parc Taulí, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sabine C de Greeff
- Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Surveillance National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Sophie Gubbels
- Data Integration and Analysis Secretariat, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Wendy Harrison
- Healthcare Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Prescribing Programme (HARP), Public Health Wales, UK
| | - Hilary Humphreys
- Department of Clinical Microbiology, The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Department of Microbiology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - Mayke B G Koek
- Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Surveillance National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Brian Kristensen
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Alain Lepape
- Clinical Research Unit, Department of Intensive Care, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Lyon Sud 69495, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Jean-Christophe Lucet
- Infection Control Unit, Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Siddharth Mookerjee
- Infection Prevention and Control Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK
| | - Pontus Naucler
- Department of Medicine Solna, Division of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Zaira R Palacios-Baena
- Unit of Infectious Diseases, Clinical Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Institute of Biomedicine of Seville (I. BIS), Sevilla, Spain
| | - Elisabeth Presterl
- Department of Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Miquel Pujol
- Infectious Diseases Unit, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Infectious Diseases Unit, Consorci Corporació Sanitària Parc Taulí, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jacqui Reilly
- Safeguarding Health Through Infection Prevention Research Group, Institute for Applied Health Research, Glasgow Caledonian University, Scotland, UK
| | - Christopher Roberts
- Healthcare Associated Infections, Antimicrobial Resistance and Prescribing Programme (HARP), Public Health Wales, UK
| | - Evelina Tacconelli
- Infectious Diseases, Research Clinical Unit, DZIF Center, University Hospital Tübingen, Germany; Infectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, University of Verona, Italy
| | - Daniel Teixeira
- Infection Control Programme, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Tängdén
- Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - John Karlsson Valik
- Department of Medicine Solna, Division of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Michael Behnke
- National Reference Center for Surveillance of nosocomial Infections, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany
| | - Petra Gastmeier
- National Reference Center for Surveillance of nosocomial Infections, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|