Dataset Information

Decision Support Capabilities of Telemedicine in Emergency Prehospital Care: Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Telemedicine offers a unique opportunity to improve coordination and administration for urgent patient care remotely. In an emergency setting, it has been used to support first responders by providing telephone or video consultation with specialists at hospitals and through the exchange of prehospital patient information. This technological solution is evolving rapidly, yet there is a concern that it is being implemented without a demonstrated clinical need and effectiveness as well as without a thorough economic evaluation.

Objective

Our objective is to systematically review whether the clinical outcomes achieved, as reported in the literature, favor telemedicine decision support for medical interventions during prehospital care.

Methods

This systematic review included peer-reviewed journal articles. Searches of 7 databases and relevant reviews were conducted. Eligibility criteria consisted of studies that covered telemedicine as data- and information-sharing and two-way teleconsultation platforms, with the objective of supporting medical decisions (eg, diagnosis, treatment, and receiving hospital decision) in a prehospital emergency setting. Simulation studies and studies that included pediatric populations were excluded. The procedures in this review followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for the assessment of risk of bias. The results were synthesized based on predefined aspects of medical decisions that are made in a prehospital setting, which include diagnostic decision support, receiving facility decisions, and medical directions for treatment. All data extractions were done by at least two reviewers independently.

Results

Out of 42 full-text reviews, 7 were found eligible. Diagnostic support and medical direction and decision for treatments were often reported. A key finding of this review was the high agreement between prehospital diagnoses via telemedicine and final in-hospital diagnoses, as supported by quantitative evidence. However, a majority of the articles described the clinical value of having access to remote experts without robust quantitative data. Most telemedicine solutions were evaluated within a feasibility or short-term preliminary study. In general, the results were positive for telemedicine use; however, biases, due to preintervention confounding factors and a lack of documentation on quality assurance and protocol for telemedicine activation, make it difficult to determine the direct effect on patient outcomes.

Conclusions

The information-sharing capacity of telemedicine enables access to remote experts to support medical decision making on scene or in prolonged field care. The influence of human and technology factors on patient care is poorly understood and documented.

SUBMITTER: Kim Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7755537 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Decision Support Capabilities of Telemedicine in Emergency Prehospital Care: Systematic Review.

Kim Yesul Y Groombridge Christopher C Romero Lorena L Clare Steven S Fitzgerald Mark Christopher MC

Journal of medical Internet research 20201208 12

<h4>Background</h4>Telemedicine offers a unique opportunity to improve coordination and administration for urgent patient care remotely. In an emergency setting, it has been used to support first responders by providing telephone or video consultation with specialists at hospitals and through the exchange of prehospital patient information. This technological solution is evolving rapidly, yet there is a concern that it is being implemented without a demonstrated clinical need and effectiveness a ...[more]

PMID: 33289672

Similar Datasets

Project description:A gap between guidelines or protocols and clinical practice often exists, which may result in patients not receiving appropriate care. Therefore, the objectives of this systematic review were (1) to give an overview of professionals' adherence to (inter)national guidelines and protocols in the emergency medical dispatch, prehospital and emergency department (ED) settings, and (2) to explore which factors influencing adherence were described in studies reporting on adherence. PubMed (including MEDLINE), CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane database for systematic reviews were systematically searched. Reference lists of included studies were also searched for eligible studies. Identified articles were screened on title, abstract and year of publication (?1990) and were included when reporting on adherence in the eligible settings. Following the initial selection, articles were screened full text and included if they concerned adherence to a (inter)national guideline or protocol, and if the time interval between data collection and publication date was <10 years. Finally, articles were assessed on reporting quality. Each step was undertaken by two independent researchers. Thirty-five articles met the criteria, none of these addressed the emergency medical dispatch setting or protocols. Median adherence ranged from 7.8-95% in the prehospital setting, and from 0-98% in the ED setting. In the prehospital setting, recommendations on monitoring came with higher median adherence percentages than treatment recommendations. For both settings, cardiology treatment recommendations came with relatively low median adherence percentages. Eight studies identified patient and organisational factors influencing adherence. The results showed that professionals' adherence to (inter)national prehospital and emergency department guidelines shows a wide variation, while adherence in the emergency medical dispatch setting is not reported. As insight in influencing factors for adherence in the emergency care settings is minimal, future research should identify such factors to allow the development of strategies to improve adherence and thus improve quality of care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Decisional tools have demonstrated their importance in informing manufacturing and commercial decisions in the monoclonal antibody domain. Recent approved therapies in regenerative medicine have shown great clinical benefits to patients. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this review was to investigate what decisional tools are available and what issues and gaps have been raised for their use in regenerative medicine. METHODS:We systematically searched MEDLINE to identify articles on decision support tools relevant to tissue engineering, and cell and gene therapy, with the aim of identifying gaps for future decisional tool development. We included published studies in English including a description of decisional tools in regenerative medicines. We extracted data using a predesigned Excel table and assessed the data both quantitatively and qualitatively. RESULTS:We identified 9 articles addressing key decisions in manufacturing and product development challenges in cell therapies. The decision objectives, parameters, assumptions, and solution methods were analyzed in detail. We found that all decisional tools focused on cell therapies, and 6 of the 9 reviews focused on allogeneic cell therapy products. We identified no available tools on tissue-engineering and gene therapy products. These studies addressed key decisions in manufacturing and product development challenges in cell therapies, such as choice of technology, through modeling. CONCLUSIONS:Our review identified a limited number of decisional tools. While the monoclonal antibodies and biologics decisional tool domain has been well developed and has shown great importance in driving more cost-effective manufacturing processes and better investment decisions, there is a lot to be learned in the regenerative medicine domain. There is ample space for expansion, especially with regard to autologous cell therapies, tissue engineering, and gene therapies. To consider the problem more comprehensively, the full needle-to-needle process should be modeled and evaluated.

Project description:BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of worldwide years lost because of disability, with a tremendous economic burden for health care systems. Digital therapeutic care (DTC) programs provide a scalable, universally accessible, and low-cost approach to the multidisciplinary treatment of LBP. Moreover, novel decision support interventions such as personalized feedback messages, push notifications, and data-driven activity recommendations amplify DTC by guiding the user through the program while aiming to increase overall engagement and sustainable behavior change.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to synthesize recent scientific literature on the impact of DTC apps for people with LBP and outline the implementation of add-on decision support interventions, including their effect on user retention and attrition rates.MethodsWe searched bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, from March 1, 2016, to October 15, 2020, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and conducted this review based on related previously published systematic reviews. Besides randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we also included study designs with the evidence level of at least a retrospective comparative study. This enables the consideration of real-world user-generated data and provides information regarding the adoption and effectiveness of DTC apps in a real-life setting. For the appraisal of the risk of bias, we used the Risk of Bias 2 Tool and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool for the RCTs and nonrandomized trials, respectively. The included studies were narratively synthesized regarding primary and secondary outcome measures, DTC components, applied decision support interventions, user retention, and attrition rates.ResultsWe retrieved 1388 citations, of which 12 studies are included in this review. Of the 12 studies, 6 (50%) were RCTs and 6 (50%) were nonrandomized trials. In all included studies, lower pain levels and increased functionality compared with baseline values were observed in the DTC intervention group. A between-group comparison revealed significant improvements in pain and functionality levels in 67% (4/6) of the RCTs. The study population was mostly homogeneous, with predominantly female, young to middle-aged participants of normal to moderate weight. The methodological quality assessment revealed moderate to high risks of biases, especially in the nonrandomized trials.ConclusionsThis systematic review demonstrates the benefits of DTC for people with LBP. There is also evidence that decision support interventions benefit overall engagement with the app and increase participants' ability to self-manage their recovery process. Finally, including retrospective evaluation studies of real-world user-generated data in future systematic reviews of digital health intervention trials can reveal new insights into the benefits, challenges, and real-life adoption of DTC programs.

Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformative potential to support prehospital clinicians, emergency physicians, and trauma surgeons in acute traumatic injury care. This scoping review examines the literature evaluating AI models using prehospital features to support early traumatic injury care. We conducted a systematic search in August 2023 of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Two independent reviewers screened titles/abstracts, with a third reviewer for adjudication, followed by a full-text analysis. We included original research and conference presentations evaluating AI models-machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and natural language processing (NLP)-that used prehospital features or features available immediately upon emergency department arrival. Review articles were excluded. The same investigators extracted data and systematically categorized outcomes to ensure consistency and transparency. We calculated kappa for interrater reliability and descriptive statistics. We identified 1050 unique publications, with 49 meeting inclusion criteria after title and abstract review (kappa 0.58) and full-text review. Publications increased annually from 2 in 2007 to 10 in 2022. Geographic analysis revealed a 61% focus on data from the United States. Studies were predominantly retrospective (88%), used local (45%) or national level (41%) data, focused on adults only (59%) or did not specify adults or pediatrics (27%), and 57% encompassed both blunt and penetrating injury mechanisms. The majority used machine learning (88%) alone or in conjunction with DL or NLP, and the top three algorithms used were support vector machine, logistic regression, and random forest. The most common study objectives were to predict the need for critical care and life-saving interventions (29%), assist in triage (22%), and predict survival (20%). A small but growing body of literature described AI models based on prehospital features that may support decisions made by dispatchers, Emergency Medical Services clinicians, and trauma teams in early traumatic injury care.

Dataset Information

Decision Support Capabilities of Telemedicine in Emergency Prehospital Care: Systematic Review.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Decision Support Capabilities of Telemedicine in Emergency Prehospital Care: Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets