Cargando…
Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol
INTRODUCTION: Electronic consultations (eConsult), asynchronous exchanges of patient health information at a distance, are increasingly used as an option to facilitate patient care and collaboration between primary care providers and specialists. Although eConsult has demonstrated success in increas...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169744/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30269069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022733 |
_version_ | 1783360552714633216 |
---|---|
author | Osman, Mohamed A Schick-Makaroff, Kara Thompson, Stephanie Featherstone, Robin Bialy, Liza Kurzawa, Julia Okpechi, Ikechi G Habib, Syed Shojai, Soroush Jindal, Kailash Klarenbach, Scott Bello, Aminu K |
author_facet | Osman, Mohamed A Schick-Makaroff, Kara Thompson, Stephanie Featherstone, Robin Bialy, Liza Kurzawa, Julia Okpechi, Ikechi G Habib, Syed Shojai, Soroush Jindal, Kailash Klarenbach, Scott Bello, Aminu K |
author_sort | Osman, Mohamed A |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Electronic consultations (eConsult), asynchronous exchanges of patient health information at a distance, are increasingly used as an option to facilitate patient care and collaboration between primary care providers and specialists. Although eConsult has demonstrated success in increasing efficiency in the referral process and enhancing access to care, little is known about the factors influencing its wider adoption and implementation by end users. In this paper, we describe a protocol to conduct a scoping review of the literature on the barriers and facilitators to a wider adoption and implementation of eConsult service. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be based on the framework pioneered by Arksey and O’Malley and later developed by Levac et al. We will use the guidance for scoping reviews developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute to report our findings. In addition to several electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EBSCOhost and PsycINFO) studies will be identified by including relevant grey literature. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and full texts for inclusion. Studies reporting on barriers and/or facilitators in settings similar to eConsult will be included. Data on study characteristics and key barriers and facilitators will be extracted. Data will be analysed thematically and classified using the Quadruple Aim framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval by research ethics board is not required since the review will only include published and publicly accessible data. Review findings will be used to inform future studies and the development of practice tools to support the wider adoption and success of eConsult implementation. We plan to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and develop a useful and accessible summary of the results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6169744 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61697442018-10-05 Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol Osman, Mohamed A Schick-Makaroff, Kara Thompson, Stephanie Featherstone, Robin Bialy, Liza Kurzawa, Julia Okpechi, Ikechi G Habib, Syed Shojai, Soroush Jindal, Kailash Klarenbach, Scott Bello, Aminu K BMJ Open Health Services Research INTRODUCTION: Electronic consultations (eConsult), asynchronous exchanges of patient health information at a distance, are increasingly used as an option to facilitate patient care and collaboration between primary care providers and specialists. Although eConsult has demonstrated success in increasing efficiency in the referral process and enhancing access to care, little is known about the factors influencing its wider adoption and implementation by end users. In this paper, we describe a protocol to conduct a scoping review of the literature on the barriers and facilitators to a wider adoption and implementation of eConsult service. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be based on the framework pioneered by Arksey and O’Malley and later developed by Levac et al. We will use the guidance for scoping reviews developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute to report our findings. In addition to several electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EBSCOhost and PsycINFO) studies will be identified by including relevant grey literature. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and full texts for inclusion. Studies reporting on barriers and/or facilitators in settings similar to eConsult will be included. Data on study characteristics and key barriers and facilitators will be extracted. Data will be analysed thematically and classified using the Quadruple Aim framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval by research ethics board is not required since the review will only include published and publicly accessible data. Review findings will be used to inform future studies and the development of practice tools to support the wider adoption and success of eConsult implementation. We plan to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and develop a useful and accessible summary of the results. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6169744/ /pubmed/30269069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022733 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Health Services Research Osman, Mohamed A Schick-Makaroff, Kara Thompson, Stephanie Featherstone, Robin Bialy, Liza Kurzawa, Julia Okpechi, Ikechi G Habib, Syed Shojai, Soroush Jindal, Kailash Klarenbach, Scott Bello, Aminu K Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title | Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title_full | Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title_fullStr | Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title_short | Barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (eConsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
title_sort | barriers and facilitators for implementation of electronic consultations (econsult) to enhance specialist access to care: a scoping review protocol |
topic | Health Services Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169744/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30269069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022733 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT osmanmohameda barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT schickmakaroffkara barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT thompsonstephanie barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT featherstonerobin barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT bialyliza barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT kurzawajulia barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT okpechiikechig barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT habibsyed barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT shojaisoroush barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT jindalkailash barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT klarenbachscott barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol AT belloaminuk barriersandfacilitatorsforimplementationofelectronicconsultationseconsulttoenhancespecialistaccesstocareascopingreviewprotocol |