Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) use cases in health care are on the rise, with the potential to improve operational efficiency and care outcomes. However, the translation of AI into practical, everyday use has been limited, as its effectiveness relies on successful implementation and adoption by clinicians, patients, and other health care stakeholders.ObjectiveAs adoption is a key factor in the successful proliferation of an innovation, this scoping review aimed at presenting an overview of the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care.MethodsA scoping review was conducted using the guidance provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect databases were searched to identify publications in English that reported on the barriers to or facilitators of AI adoption in health care. This review focused on articles published between January 2011 and December 2023. The review did not have any limitations regarding the health care setting (hospital or community) or the population (patients, clinicians, physicians, or health care administrators). A thematic analysis was conducted on the selected articles to map factors associated with the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care.ResultsA total of 2514 articles were identified in the initial search. After title and abstract reviews, 50 (1.99%) articles were included in the final analysis. These articles were reviewed for the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care. Most articles were empirical studies, literature reviews, reports, and thought articles. Approximately 18 categories of barriers and facilitators were identified. These were organized sequentially to provide considerations for AI development, implementation, and the overall structure needed to facilitate adoption.ConclusionsThe literature review revealed that trust is a significant catalyst of adoption, and it was found to be impacted by several barriers identified in this review. A governance structure can be a key facilitator, among others, in ensuring all the elements identified as barriers are addressed appropriately. The findings demonstrate that the implementation of AI in health care is still, in many ways, dependent on the establishment of regulatory and legal frameworks. Further research into a combination of governance and implementation frameworks, models, or theories to enhance trust that would specifically enable adoption is needed to provide the necessary guidance to those translating AI research into practice. Future research could also be expanded to include attempts at understanding patients' perspectives on complex, high-risk AI use cases and how the use of AI applications affects clinical practice and patient care, including sociotechnical considerations, as more algorithms are implemented in actual clinical environments.

Project description:BackgroundTelehealth is increasingly used in palliative care and its application is seen as one possible solution to improve access to palliative care services, thereby providing additional support for patients with advanced cancer. By completing a systematic review of the literature this research identifies the barriers and facilitators of telehealth adoption by patients with advanced cancer to determine the type of healthcare services needed to meet their needs.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted on CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore as well as grey literature to identify the barriers and facilitators of adopting telehealth by patients with advanced cancer in palliative care. The search was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023446460) and focused on articles published between March 2021 and August 2023, after the first wave of COVID-19.ResultsOverall, nine papers were identified and included in the review. Patients with advanced cancer were found to be willing to use telehealth reporting a high satisfaction. Patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care experienced barriers such as software and hardware failures as well as technical issues. Complicating this even further was a language barrier, as well as aging and medical issues. Older patients found the use of telehealth difficult and reported needing additional support around its use, yet telehealth was broadly found to be accepted. Telehealth facilitated a sense of independence, control, comfort and security to patients. Operating in the background while remaining available it promoted a sense of empowerment for patients.ConclusionsIdentification of the barriers and facilitators of telehealth use by patients with advanced cancer in palliative care, contributes to condition specific benchmarks for telehealth use and further informs national treatment guidelines around patients with advanced cancer needs to ensure sustainability and relevance now and in the future.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare organisations and teams perform improvement activities to facilitate high-quality healthcare. The use of an improvement coach who provides support and guidance to the healthcare team may facilitate improvement activities; however, no systematic review exists on the facilitators and barriers to implementing an improvement coach.AimsWe conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis to examine the facilitators and barriers to the implementation of improvement coaching.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE® , Embase and CINAHL. The final search was in March 2021. The screening eligibility criteria included the following: interdisciplinary team receiving the coaching, improvement coaching, designs with a qualitative component and primary purpose of evaluating practice facilitation in OECD countries. An ecologically-informed consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) served as the framework for coding. Patterns of barriers and facilitators across domains were identified through matrix analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using Critical Appraisal Skills Program. PRISMA reporting guidelines served as a guide for reporting this review.ResultsNineteen studies with a qualitative component met the inclusion criteria. Four themes of barriers and facilitators crossed multiple CFIR domains: adaptability (e.g. making adjustments to the project; process, or approach); knowledge and skills (e.g. understanding of content and process for the project); engagement (e.g. willingness to be involved in the process) and resources (e.g. assets required to complete the improvement process).ConclusionImprovement coaching is a complex intervention that influences the context, healthcare team being coached and improvement activities. Improvement coaches should understand how to minimise barriers and promote facilitators that are unique to each improvement project across the domains. Limitations of the study are related to the nature of the intervention including potential publication bias given quality improvement focus; the variety of terms similar to improvement coaching or selection of framework.

Project description:BackgroundConventional clinical trials are essential for generating high-quality evidence by measuring the efficacy of interventions in rigorously controlled clinical environments. However, their execution can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, clinical trials face several logistical challenges regarding the identification, recruitment, and retention of participants; consistent data collection during trials; and adequate patient follow-up. This might lead to inefficient resource utilization. In order to partially address the current problems with conventional clinical trials, there exists the need for innovations. One such innovation is the virtual clinical trial (VCT). VCTs allow for the collection and integration of diverse data from multiple information sources, such as electronic health records, clinical and demographic data, patient-reported outcomes, anthropometric and activity measurements, and data collected by digital biomarkers or (small) samples that participants can collect themselves. Although VCTs have the potential to provide substantial value to clinical research and patients because they can lower clinical trial costs, increase the volume of data collected from patients' daily environment, and reduce the burden of patient participation, so far VCT adoption is not commonplace.ObjectiveThis paper aims to better understand the barriers and facilitators to VCT adoption by determining the factors that influence individuals' considerations regarding VCTs from the perspective of various stakeholders.MethodsBased on online semistructured interviews, a qualitative study was conducted with pharmaceutical companies, food and health organizations, and an applied research organization in Europe. Data were thematically analyzed using Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory.ResultsA total of 16 individuals with interest and experience in VCTs were interviewed, including persons from pharmaceutical companies (n=6), food and health organizations (n=4), and a research organization (n=6). Key barriers included a potentially low degree of acceptance by regulatory authorities, technical issues (standardization, validation, and data storage), compliance and adherence, and lack of knowledge or comprehension regarding the opportunities VCTs have to offer. Involvement of regulators in development processes, stakeholder exposure to the results of pilot studies, and clear and simple instructions and assistance for patients were considered key facilitators.ConclusionsCollaboration among all stakeholders in VCT development is crucial to increase knowledge and awareness. Organizations should invest in accurate data collection technologies, and compliance of patients in VCTs needs to be ensured. Multicriteria decision analysis can help determine if a VCT is a preferred option by stakeholders. The findings of this study can be a good starting point to accelerate the development and widespread implementation of VCTs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Kangaroo mother care (KMC) has been proved to be a safe and cost-effective standard of care for preterm babies. China hasn't adopted the KMC practice widely until recently. We aim to assess barriers and facilitators of KMC adoption in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and postnatal wards in China. METHODS:We conducted clinical observations and semi-structured interviews with nurses, physicians, and parents who performed KMC in seven NICUs and postnatal wards housed in five hospitals in different provinces of China between August and September 2018. The interviews provided first-hand stakeholder perspectives on barriers and facilitators of KMC implementation and sustainability. We further explored health system's readiness and families' willingness to sustain KMC practice following its pilot introduction. We coded data for emerging themes related to financial barriers, parent- and hospital-level perceived barriers, and facilitators of KMC adoption, specifically those unique in the Chinese context. RESULTS:Five hospitals with KMC pilot programs were selected for clinical observations and 38 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Common cultural barriers included concerns with the conflict with traditional postpartum confinement (Zuo-yue-zi) practice and grandparents' resistance, while a strong family support is a facilitator for KMC adoption. Some parents reported anxiety and guilt associated with having a preterm baby, which can be a parental-level barrier to KMC. Hospital-level factors such as fear of nosocomial infection and shortage of staff and spaces impeded the KMC implementation, and supportive community and peer group organized by the hospital contributed to KMC uptake. Financial barriers included lodging costs for caregivers and supply costs for hospitals. CONCLUSIONS:We provided a comprehensive in-depth report on the multi-level KMC barriers and facilitators in China. We recommend policy interventions specifically addressing these barriers and facilitators and increase family and peer support to improve KMC adoption in China. We also recommend that well-designed local cultural and economic feasibility and acceptability studies should be conducted before the KMC uptake.

Dataset Information

Facilitators and barriers to evidence adoption for central venous catheters post-insertion maintenance in oncology nurses: a multi-center mixed methods study

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets