Dataset Information

Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:mHealth, the practice of medicine aided by mobile devices is a growing market. Although the offer on Anesthesia applications (Apps) is quite prolific, representative formal assessments on the views of anesthesia practitioners on its use and potential place in daily practice is lacking. This survey aimed thus to cross-assess the Belgian anesthesia population on the use of smartphone Apps and peripherals. METHODS:The survey was exclusively distributed as an online anonymous questionnaire. Sharing took place via hyperlink forwarding by the Belgian Society for Anesthesia and Reanimation (BSAR) and by the Belgian Association for Regional Anesthesia (BARA) to all registered members. The first answer took place on 5 September 2018, the last on 22 January 2019. RESULTS:Three hundred forty-nine answers were obtained (26.9% corresponding to trainees, 73.1% to specialists). Anesthesiologists were positively confident that Apps and peripherals could help improve anesthesia care (57.0 and 47.9%, respectively, scored 4 or 5, in a scale from 0 to 5). Trainees were significantly more confident than specialists on both mobile Apps (71.2% and 51.8%, respectively; p?=?0.001) and peripherals (77.7% and 45.1%, respectively; p?=?0.09). The usefulness of Apps and Peripherals was rated 1 or below (on a 0 to 5 scale), respectively, by 9.5 and 14.6% of the total surveyed population, being specialists proportionally less confident in Smartphone peripherals than trainees (p?=?0.008). Mobile apps are actively used by a significantly higher proportional number of trainees (67.0% vs. 37.3%, respectively; p?=?0.000001). The preferred category of mobile Apps was dose-calculating applications (39.15%), followed by digital books (21. 1%) and Apps for active perioperative monitoring (20.0%). CONCLUSIONS:Belgian Anesthesia practitioners show a global positive attitude towards smartphone Apps and Peripherals, with trainees trending to be more confident than specialists. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov database Identifier: NCT03750084. Retrospectively registered on 21 November 2018.

SUBMITTER: Carvalho H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7053134 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.

Carvalho Hugo H Verdonck Michael M Forget Patrice P Poelaert Jan J

BMC anesthesiology 20200303 1

<h4>Background</h4>mHealth, the practice of medicine aided by mobile devices is a growing market. Although the offer on Anesthesia applications (Apps) is quite prolific, representative formal assessments on the views of anesthesia practitioners on its use and potential place in daily practice is lacking. This survey aimed thus to cross-assess the Belgian anesthesia population on the use of smartphone Apps and peripherals.<h4>Methods</h4>The survey was exclusively distributed as an online anonymo ...[more]

PMID: 32126985

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe number of people receiving antidepressants has increased in the past 3 decades, mainly because of people staying on them longer. However, in many cases long-term treatment is not evidence based and risks increasing side effects. Additionally, prompting general practitioners (GPs) to review medication does not improve the rate of appropriate discontinuation. Therefore, GPs and other health professionals may need help to support patients discontinuing antidepressants in primary care.ObjectiveThis study aims to develop a digital intervention to support practitioners in helping patients discontinue inappropriate long-term antidepressants (as part of a wider intervention package including a patient digital intervention and patient telephone support).MethodsA prototype digital intervention called Advisor for Health Professionals (ADvisor HP) was planned and developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The following elements informed development: a literature review and qualitative synthesis, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles for design elements, and theoretical behavioral analyses. The intervention was then optimized through think-aloud qualitative interviews with health professionals while they were using the prototype intervention.ResultsThink-aloud qualitative interviews with 19 health professionals suggested that the digital intervention contained useful information and was readily accessible to practitioners. The development work highlighted a need for further guidance on drug tapering schedules for practitioners and clarity about who is responsible for broaching the subject of discontinuation. Practitioners highlighted the need to have information in easily and quickly accessible formats because of time constraints in day-to-day practice. Some GPs felt that some information was already known to them but understood why this was included. Practitioners differed in their ideas about how they would use ADvisor HP in practice, with some preferring to read the resource in its entirety and others wanting to dip in and out as needed. Changes were made to the wording and structure of the intervention in response to the feedback provided.ConclusionsADvisor HP is a digital intervention that has been developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The optimization work suggests that practitioners may find this tool to be useful in supporting the reduction of long-term antidepressant use. Further quantitative and qualitative evaluation through a randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

Project description:ImportanceMost physicians must exercise discretion in choosing billing details that determine payment for their services. Understanding the degree to which physicians inappropriately use this discretion has important implications for payment policies. However, separating higher case complexity from inappropriate billing has made this a challenging issue to study. Anesthesia offers a useful test case because practitioners are partly compensated by self-reported length of time (anesthesia time) spent on a case.ObjectiveTo characterize the incidence and consequences of inappropriate billing practices among anesthesia practitioners.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study of data from a large anesthesia registry, 6 261 955 procedures performed by 4221 anesthesia practitioners (physician anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, and anesthesiologist assistants) between January 1, 2010, and March 31, 2015, were studied. A total of 3047 practitioners practiced primarily in community hospitals, whereas 453 practiced primarily in university hospitals and 721 practiced in other settings (eg, specialty hospital).ExposuresPractitioners with anomalous patterns were identified as those reporting an unusually high number of anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes (eg, 65 minutes).Main outcomes and measuresIncidence of anomalous patterns among anesthesia practitioners and the increase in anesthesia times associated with these patterns.ResultsThis study included 4221 practitioners who each performed at least 300 anesthetic procedures. Practitioners in the top fifth percentile reported anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes a mean (SD) of 53.7% (13.7%) of the time (range, 36.8%-96.1%), whereas practitioners in the 6th to 10th percentiles reported anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes a mean (SD) of 31.8% (2.0%) of the time (range, 29.2%-36.7%). Practitioners in the top fifth percentile submitted billing for anesthesia times that exceeded the expected time by a mean of 21.5 minutes (95% CI, 15.8-27.1 minutes).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, findings suggest that anesthesia practitioners with the highest tendency to report anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes did so with high frequency, which reflects anomalous billing. These practitioners also sought payment for longer-than-expected anesthesia times, which would correspond to higher payment for their services.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Common mental health problems are mainly treated in primary care settings and collaboration with mental health services is needed. Prior to re-organisation of the mental health care offer in a geographical area, a study was organized: 1) to evaluate GPs' opinions on their day-to-day practice with Patients with Mental Health Problems (PMHP) and on relationships with Mental Health Professionals (MHPro); 2) to identify factors associated with perceived need for collaboration with MHPro and with actual collaboration. METHODS: All GPs in the South Yvelines area in France (n = 492) were informed of the implementation of a local mental health program. GPs interested in taking part (n = 180) were invited to complete a satisfaction questionnaire on their practice in the field of Mental Health and to include prospectively all PMHP consultants over an 8-day period (n = 1519). For each PMHP, data was collected on demographic and clinical profile, and on needs (met v. unmet) for collaboration with MHPro. RESULTS: A majority of GPs rated PMHP as requiring more care (83.4%), more time (92.3%), more frequent consultations (64.0%) and as being more difficult to refer (87.7%) than other patients. A minority of GPs had a satisfactory relationship with private psychiatrists (49.5%), public psychiatrists (35%) and social workers (27.8%). 53.9% had a less satisfactory relationship with MHPro than with other physicians. Needs for collaboration with a MHPro were more often felt in caring for PMHP who were young, not in employment, with mental health problems lasting for more than one year, with a history of psychiatric hospitalization, and showing reluctance to talk of psychological problems and to consult a MHPro. Needs for collaboration were more often met among PMHP with past psychiatric consultation or hospitalization and when the patient was not reluctant to consult a MHPro. Where needs were not met, GP would opt for the classic procedure of mental health referral for only 31.3% of their PMHP. CONCLUSION: GPs need targeted collaboration with MHPro to support their management of PMHP, whom they are willing to care for without systematic referral to specialists as the major therapeutic option.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mobile health (mHealth)-a method of assisting long-term care in patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases (CVDs)-is gaining popularity in China, mainly owing to the large number of patients and limited clinical resources. Patients of different ages have varying needs for CVD management. However, evidence regarding how age influences Chinese CVD patients' use and perceptions of mHealth is limited. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to explore age-related differences among Chinese patients with CVD regarding their use and perceptions of mHealth and to determine the factors that influence this population's willingness to use mHealth technologies. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with chronic CVDs in a tertiary hospital in Beijing using a new questionnaire designed by the investigators. Participants were sourced using nonproportional quota-sampling methods, being recruited consecutively in each sampling category (age 18-49, 50-64, 65-74, and ≥75 years, with at least 25 men and 25 women in each age group). The survey consisted of 5 parts, including sociodemographic profile and medical history; current disease management situation; self-evaluation of disease management; current usage of mobile and internet technology (IT); and willingness to use an mHealth solution to perform disease self-management. Responses were compared among the 4 age groups as well as between patients who were willing to use mHealth solutions and those who were not. Multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of willingness to use mHealth for self-management. RESULTS:Overall, 231 patients (124 men) completed the questionnaire; of these, 53 were aged 18-49 years, 66 were aged 50-64 years, 54 were aged 65-74 years, and 58 were aged ≥75 years. Patients in the older cohorts visited hospitals more often than did those in the younger cohorts (P<.001), and they also showed lower technology skills regarding the use of mobile or internet devices (P<.001) and searched for health-related information on the internet less often (P<.001). In addition, 68.0% (157/231) of the patients showed interest in using mHealth solution to manage their disease; of these, 40.8% (64/157) were aged 65 years. Patients who were more willing to use mHealth solution to manage their diseases were younger (P<.001), more educated (P<.001), still working (P=.001), possessed higher skill regarding mobile or internet device use (P<.001), and more frequently searched for health information on the internet (P<.001). Finally, multivariate logistic regression showed that IT skill was the single indicator (P=.003) of willingness to use mHealth, not age. CONCLUSIONS:Although age is associated with the use of mobile or internet devices, the sole indicator of mHealth use for self-management was participants' IT skills. Education regarding the use of mobile devices and development of easy-to-use software might improve the acceptance of mHealth solutions among older patient populations.

Project description:AimsWe will first examine whether seeking help for depression and schizophrenia from mental health professionals is nowadays more accepted among the German public than it used to be 30 years ago. Next, we will explore whether changes in help-seeking preferences between 1990 and 2020 are specific to mental health professions or are part of changes in attitudes to professional help-seeking in general. Finally, we will study whether a temporal relationship does exist between the advent of awareness-raising and anti-stigma campaigns after the turn of the millennium and changes in the acceptance of mental health care.MethodsIn 1990 (n = 2044), 2001 (n = 4005), 2011 (n = 1984) and 2020 (n = 2449) methodologically identical population-based surveys were conducted in Germany. After presentation of an unlabelled case vignette depicting someone with either schizophrenia or depression, we asked about help-seeking recommendations for the person described.ResultsThe German public's readiness to recommend seeking help from mental health professionals has markedly grown over the past 30 years. In contrast, in the eyes of the public, turning to a general practitioner has become only slightly more, consulting a priest even less advisable than it used to be three decades ago. Seeing a naturopath is seen with markedly less disapproval today compared to 1990, but explicit recommendation of this helping source has not increased correspondingly in. The most pronounced increase in the German public's propensity to recommend seeking help from mental health professionals occurred already in the 1990s, i.e. before efforts to heighten public awareness had started.ConclusionsToday, the German public is more in favour of mental health professionals than it used to be three decades ago. This seems to be a specific trend, and not to reflecting an increasing propensity towards professional help-seeking in general. Our findings counter the narrative that mental health communication efforts and initiatives have created more favourable attitudes towards mental health care among the public, since the observed changes in attitudes have preceded any campaigns. Instead, we tend to interpret the rise of the popularity of mental health professionals as a reflection of general cultural changes that have taken place over the past decades in Germany, as in other western countries.

Dataset Information

Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.

Publications

Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets