Cargando…

Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Telehealth is growing and its application in palliative care is seen as a solution to pressures on palliative care services. A 2010 UK review reported growing awareness of telehealth in palliative care but a lack of evidence-based research to support its use. The primary aim of this revi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hancock, Sophie, Preston, Nancy, Jones, Helen, Gadoud, Amy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6911274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31835998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-019-0495-5
_version_ 1783479233918533632
author Hancock, Sophie
Preston, Nancy
Jones, Helen
Gadoud, Amy
author_facet Hancock, Sophie
Preston, Nancy
Jones, Helen
Gadoud, Amy
author_sort Hancock, Sophie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Telehealth is growing and its application in palliative care is seen as a solution to pressures on palliative care services. A 2010 UK review reported growing awareness of telehealth in palliative care but a lack of evidence-based research to support its use. The primary aim of this review was to describe the current use of telehealth in palliative care in the UK and evaluate telehealth initiatives against a digital service standard. The secondary aim was to explore whether telehealth results in a reduction in emergency care access. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature with thematic synthesis. Records were screened and data extracted by two reviewers. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Psychinfo and Cochrane central register for controlled trials were searched using pre-defined terms. Hand searching of conference literature, thesis databases and citation tracking was also conducted. The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and can be found at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017080038. RESULTS: The search identified 3807 titles and 30 studies were included in the review. Telehealth was used to support patients and carers, electronic record keeping and professional education. Notably, the number of home telemonitoring initiatives for patients had increased from the 2010 review. Despite this variety, many studies were small scale, descriptive and provided little evidence of evaluation of the service. Ten papers were sufficiently detailed to allow appraisal against the digital service standard and only one of these met all of the criteria to some extent. Seven studies made reference to emergency care access. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is growth of telehealth services, there remains a lack of evaluation and robust study design meaning conclusions regarding the clinical application of telehealth in palliative care cannot be drawn. There is insufficient evidence to appreciate any benefit of telehealth on access to emergency care. Future work is needed to evaluate the use of telehealth in palliative care and improve telehealth design in line with digital service standards.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6911274
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69112742019-12-23 Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review Hancock, Sophie Preston, Nancy Jones, Helen Gadoud, Amy BMC Palliat Care Research Article BACKGROUND: Telehealth is growing and its application in palliative care is seen as a solution to pressures on palliative care services. A 2010 UK review reported growing awareness of telehealth in palliative care but a lack of evidence-based research to support its use. The primary aim of this review was to describe the current use of telehealth in palliative care in the UK and evaluate telehealth initiatives against a digital service standard. The secondary aim was to explore whether telehealth results in a reduction in emergency care access. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature with thematic synthesis. Records were screened and data extracted by two reviewers. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Psychinfo and Cochrane central register for controlled trials were searched using pre-defined terms. Hand searching of conference literature, thesis databases and citation tracking was also conducted. The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and can be found at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017080038. RESULTS: The search identified 3807 titles and 30 studies were included in the review. Telehealth was used to support patients and carers, electronic record keeping and professional education. Notably, the number of home telemonitoring initiatives for patients had increased from the 2010 review. Despite this variety, many studies were small scale, descriptive and provided little evidence of evaluation of the service. Ten papers were sufficiently detailed to allow appraisal against the digital service standard and only one of these met all of the criteria to some extent. Seven studies made reference to emergency care access. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is growth of telehealth services, there remains a lack of evaluation and robust study design meaning conclusions regarding the clinical application of telehealth in palliative care cannot be drawn. There is insufficient evidence to appreciate any benefit of telehealth on access to emergency care. Future work is needed to evaluate the use of telehealth in palliative care and improve telehealth design in line with digital service standards. BioMed Central 2019-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6911274/ /pubmed/31835998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-019-0495-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hancock, Sophie
Preston, Nancy
Jones, Helen
Gadoud, Amy
Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title_full Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title_fullStr Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title_short Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
title_sort telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6911274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31835998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12904-019-0495-5
work_keys_str_mv AT hancocksophie telehealthinpalliativecareisbeingdescribedbutnotevaluatedasystematicreview
AT prestonnancy telehealthinpalliativecareisbeingdescribedbutnotevaluatedasystematicreview
AT joneshelen telehealthinpalliativecareisbeingdescribedbutnotevaluatedasystematicreview
AT gadoudamy telehealthinpalliativecareisbeingdescribedbutnotevaluatedasystematicreview