Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 10;14(6):e075833.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075833.

Implementation barriers and facilitators of remote monitoring, remote consultation and digital care platforms through the eyes of healthcare professionals: a review of reviews

Susan J Oudbier  1   2   3   4 , Sylvie P Souget-Ruff  2 , Britney S J Chen  2 , Kirsten A Ziesemer  5 , Hans J Meij  6   7 , Ellen M A Smets  2   4   8
Affiliations

Implementation barriers and facilitators of remote monitoring, remote consultation and digital care platforms through the eyes of healthcare professionals: a review of reviews

Susan J Oudbier et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Digital transformation in healthcare is a necessity considering the steady increase in healthcare costs, the growing ageing population and rising number of people living with chronic diseases. The implementation of digital health technologies in patient care is a potential solution to these issues, however, some challenges remain. In order to navigate such complexities, the perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) must be considered. The objective of this umbrella review is to identify key barriers and facilitators involved in digital health technology implementation, from the perspective of HCPs.

Design: Systematic umbrella review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

Data sources: Embase.com, PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for existing reviews dated up to 17 June 2022. Search terms included digital health technology, combined with terms related to implementation, and variations in terms encompassing HCP, such as physician, doctor and the medical discipline.

Eligibility criteria: Quantitative and qualitative reviews evaluating digital technologies that included patient interaction were considered eligible. Three reviewers independently synthesised and assessed eligible reviews and conducted a critical appraisal.

Data extraction and synthesis: Regarding the data collection, two reviewers independently synthesised and interpreted data on barriers and facilitators.

Results: Thirty-three reviews met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators were categorised into four levels: (1) the organisation, (2) the HCP, (3) the patient and (4) technical aspects. The main barriers and facilitators identified were (lack of) training (n=22/33), (un)familiarity with technology (n=17/33), (loss of) communication (n=13/33) and security and confidentiality issues (n=17/33). Barriers of key importance included increased workload (n=16/33), the technology undermining aspects of professional identity (n=11/33), HCP uncertainty about patients' aptitude with the technology (n=9/33), and technical issues (n=12/33).

Conclusions: The implementation strategy should address the key barriers highlighted by HCPs, for instance, by providing adequate training to familiarise HCPs with the technology, adapting the technology to the patient preferences and addressing technical issues. Barriers on both HCP and patient levels can be overcome by investigating the needs of the end-users. As we shift from traditional face-to-face care models towards new modes of care delivery, further research is needed to better understand the role of digital technology in the HCP-patient relationship.

Keywords: health informatics; information technology; telemedicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the article selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Top three barriers or facilitators on each level of digital health implementation, and practical implications or solutions. HCP, healthcare professional.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kollerup A, Kjellberg J, Ibsen R. Ageing and health care expenditures: the importance of age per se, steepening of the individual-level expenditure curve, and the role of morbidity. Eur J Health Econ 2022;23:1121–49. 10.1007/s10198-021-01413-x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gentili A, Failla G, Melnyk A, et al. . The cost-effectiveness of Digital health interventions: A systematic review of the literature. Front Public Health 2022;10:787135. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.787135 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. van de Vijver S, Tensen P, Asiki G, et al. . Digital health for all: how Digital health could reduce inequality and increase universal health coverage. Digit HEALTH 2023;9:20552076231185434. 10.1177/20552076231185434 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Senbekov M, Saliev T, Bukeyeva Z, et al. . The recent progress and applications of Digital Technologies in Healthcare: A review. Int J Telemed Appl 2020;2020:8830200. 10.1155/2020/8830200 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zorgakkoord I. Samenwerken Aan Gezonde Zorg. Netherlands: Rijksoverheid, 2022.

Publication types