Cargando…
Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews
The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth inter...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10124999/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00049-3 |
_version_ | 1785029945626460160 |
---|---|
author | Shaffer, Kelly M Turner, Kea L Siwik, Chelsea Gonzalez, Brian D Upasani, Rujula Glazer, Jillian V Ferguson, Robert J Joshua, Catherine Low, Carissa A |
author_facet | Shaffer, Kelly M Turner, Kea L Siwik, Chelsea Gonzalez, Brian D Upasani, Rujula Glazer, Jillian V Ferguson, Robert J Joshua, Catherine Low, Carissa A |
author_sort | Shaffer, Kelly M |
collection | PubMed |
description | The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth interventions in cancer published from database inception up to May 1, 2022, from PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. Eligible reviews conducted a systematic literature search. Data were extracted in duplicate via a pre-defined online survey. Following screening, 134 reviews met the eligibility criteria. 77 of those reviews were published since 2020. 128 reviews summarised interventions intended for patients, 18 addressed family caregivers, and five addressed health-care providers. 56 reviews did not target a specific phase of the cancer continuum, whereas 48 reviews tended to address the active treatment phase. 29 reviews included a meta-analysis, with results showing positive effects on quality of life, psychological outcomes, and screening behaviours. 83 reviews did not report intervention implementation outcomes but when reported, 36 reported acceptability, 32 feasibility, and 29 fidelity outcomes. Several notable gaps were identified in these literature reviews on digital health and telehealth in cancer care. No reviews specifically addressed older adults, bereavement, or sustainability of interventions and only two reviews focused on comparing telehealth to in-person interventions. Addressing these gaps with rigorous systematic reviews might help guide continued innovation in remote cancer care, particularly for older adults and bereaved families, and integrate and sustain these interventions within oncology. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10124999 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101249992023-04-25 Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews Shaffer, Kelly M Turner, Kea L Siwik, Chelsea Gonzalez, Brian D Upasani, Rujula Glazer, Jillian V Ferguson, Robert J Joshua, Catherine Low, Carissa A Lancet Digit Health Review The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth interventions in cancer published from database inception up to May 1, 2022, from PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. Eligible reviews conducted a systematic literature search. Data were extracted in duplicate via a pre-defined online survey. Following screening, 134 reviews met the eligibility criteria. 77 of those reviews were published since 2020. 128 reviews summarised interventions intended for patients, 18 addressed family caregivers, and five addressed health-care providers. 56 reviews did not target a specific phase of the cancer continuum, whereas 48 reviews tended to address the active treatment phase. 29 reviews included a meta-analysis, with results showing positive effects on quality of life, psychological outcomes, and screening behaviours. 83 reviews did not report intervention implementation outcomes but when reported, 36 reported acceptability, 32 feasibility, and 29 fidelity outcomes. Several notable gaps were identified in these literature reviews on digital health and telehealth in cancer care. No reviews specifically addressed older adults, bereavement, or sustainability of interventions and only two reviews focused on comparing telehealth to in-person interventions. Addressing these gaps with rigorous systematic reviews might help guide continued innovation in remote cancer care, particularly for older adults and bereaved families, and integrate and sustain these interventions within oncology. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2023-05 2023-04-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10124999/ /pubmed/37100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00049-3 Text en © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Review Shaffer, Kelly M Turner, Kea L Siwik, Chelsea Gonzalez, Brian D Upasani, Rujula Glazer, Jillian V Ferguson, Robert J Joshua, Catherine Low, Carissa A Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title | Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title_full | Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title_fullStr | Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title_short | Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
title_sort | digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10124999/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00049-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shafferkellym digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT turnerkeal digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT siwikchelsea digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT gonzalezbriand digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT upasanirujula digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT glazerjillianv digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT fergusonrobertj digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT joshuacatherine digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews AT lowcarissaa digitalhealthandtelehealthincancercareascopingreviewofreviews |