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 Oct 17:10:e53462.
doi: 10.2196/53462.

Design, Implementation, and Analysis of an Assessment and Accreditation Model to Evaluate a Digital Competence Framework for Health Professionals: Mixed Methods Study

Francesc Saigí-Rubió #  1 , Teresa Romeu #  2 , Eulàlia Hernández Encuentra #  2 , Montse Guitert #  2 , Erik Andrés #  3 , Elisenda Reixach #  3
Affiliations

Design, Implementation, and Analysis of an Assessment and Accreditation Model to Evaluate a Digital Competence Framework for Health Professionals: Mixed Methods Study

Francesc Saigí-Rubió et al. JMIR Med Educ. .

Abstract

Background: Although digital health is essential for improving health care, its adoption remains slow due to the lack of literacy in this area. Therefore, it is crucial for health professionals to acquire digital skills and for a digital competence assessment and accreditation model to be implemented to make advances in this field.

Objective: This study had two objectives: (1) to create a specific map of digital competences for health professionals and (2) to define and test a digital competence assessment and accreditation model for health professionals.

Methods: We took an iterative mixed methods approach, which included a review of the gray literature and consultation with local experts. We used the arithmetic mean and SD in descriptive statistics, P values in hypothesis testing and subgroup comparisons, the greatest lower bound in test diagnosis, and the discrimination index in study instrument analysis.

Results: The assessment model designed in accordance with the competence content defined in the map of digital competences and based on scenarios had excellent internal consistency overall (greatest lower bound=0.91). Although most study participants (110/122, 90.2%) reported an intermediate self-perceived digital competence level, we found that the vast majority would not attain a level-2 Accreditation of Competence in Information and Communication Technologies.

Conclusions: Knowing the digital competence level of health professionals based on a defined competence framework should enable such professionals to be trained and updated to meet real needs in their specific professional contexts and, consequently, take full advantage of the potential of digital technologies. These results have informed the Health Plan for Catalonia 2021-2025, thus laying the foundations for creating and offering specific training to assess and certify the digital competence of such professionals.

Keywords: competencies; digital health; digital technology; eHealth; eHealth competencies; eHealth literacy; health care professionals; health care workers; health literacy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the literature search.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Participants’ self-perceived level in each of the digital competences defined for health professionals.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Armaignac DL, Saxena A, Rubens M, Valle CA, Williams LM, Veledar E, Gidel LT. Impact of telemedicine on mortality, length of stay, and cost among patients in progressive care units: experience from a large healthcare system. Crit Care Med. 2018 May;46(5):728–35. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002994. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/29384782 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nazeha N, Pavagadhi D, Kyaw BM, Car J, Jimenez G, Tudor Car L. A digitally competent health workforce: scoping review of educational frameworks. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Nov 05;22(11):e22706. doi: 10.2196/22706. https://www.jmir.org/2020/11/e22706/ v22i11e22706 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Koehler F, Koehler K, Deckwart O, Prescher S, Wegscheider K, Kirwan B, Winkler S, Vettorazzi E, Bruch L, Oeff M, Zugck C, Doerr G, Naegele H, Störk S, Butter C, Sechtem U, Angermann C, Gola G, Prondzinsky R, Edelmann F, Spethmann S, Schellong SM, Schulze PC, Bauersachs J, Wellge B, Schoebel C, Tajsic M, Dreger H, Anker SD, Stangl K. Efficacy of telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure (TIM-HF2): a randomised, controlled, parallel-group, unmasked trial. Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392(10152):1047–57. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31880-4.S0140-6736(18)31880-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mian A, Khan S. Medical education during pandemics: a UK perspective. BMC Med. 2020 Apr 09;18(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01577-y. https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-020-01577-y 10.1186/s12916-020-01577-y - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jimenez G, Spinazze P, Matchar D, Koh Choon Huat G, van der Kleij RM, Chavannes NH, Car J. Digital health competencies for primary healthcare professionals: a scoping review. Int J Med Inform. 2020 Nov;143:104260. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104260.S1386-5056(20)31147-3 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources