Assessing the carbon footprint of digital health interventions: a scoping review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
Integration of environmentally sustainable digital health interventions requires robust evaluation of their carbon emission life-cycle before implementation in healthcare. This scoping review surveys the evidence on available environmental assessment frameworks, methods, and tools to evaluate the carbon footprint of digital health interventions for environmentally sustainable healthcare.Materials and methods
Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid). PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus (which indexes IEEE Xplore, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science and ACM databases), Compendex, and Inspec databases were searched with no time or language constraints. The Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA_SCR), Joanna Briggs Scoping Review Framework, and template for intervention description and replication (TiDiER) checklist were used to structure and report the findings.Results
From 3299 studies screened, data was extracted from 13 full-text studies. No standardised methods or validated tools were identified to systematically determine the environmental sustainability of a digital health intervention over its full life-cycle from conception to realisation. Most studies (n = 8) adapted publicly available carbon calculators to estimate telehealth travel-related emissions. Others adapted these tools to examine the environmental impact of electronic health records (n = 2), e-prescriptions and e-referrals (n = 1), and robotic surgery (n = 1). One study explored optimising the information system electricity consumption of telemedicine. No validated systems-based approach to evaluation and validation of digital health interventions could be identified.Conclusion
There is a need to develop standardised, validated methods and tools for healthcare environments to assist stakeholders to make informed decisions about reduction of carbon emissions from digital health interventions.
SUBMITTER: Lokmic-Tomkins Z
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9667173 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Assessing the carbon footprint of digital health interventions: a scoping review.
Lokmic-Tomkins Zerina Z Davies Shauna S Block Lorraine J LJ Cochrane Lindy L Dorin Alan A von Gerich Hanna H Lozada-Perezmitre Erika E Reid Lisa L Peltonen Laura-Maria LM
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20221101 12
<h4>Objective</h4>Integration of environmentally sustainable digital health interventions requires robust evaluation of their carbon emission life-cycle before implementation in healthcare. This scoping review surveys the evidence on available environmental assessment frameworks, methods, and tools to evaluate the carbon footprint of digital health interventions for environmentally sustainable healthcare.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid). PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, Web of ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDigital health technologies are widely used for disease management, with their computing platforms, software, and sensors being used for health care. These technologies are developed to manage chronic diseases and infectious bacterial diseases, including tuberculosis (TB).ObjectiveThis study aims to comprehensively review the literature on the use of digital health interventions (DHIs) for enhancing TB treatment adherence and identify major strategies for their adoption.MethodsWe conducted a literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid Embase, and Scopus databases for relevant studies published between January 2012 and March 2022. Studies that focused on web-based or mobile phone-based interventions, medication adherence, digital health, randomized controlled trials, digital interventions, or mobile health and ubiquitous health technology for TB treatment and related health outcomes were included.ResultsWe identified 27 relevant studies and classified them according to the intervention method, a significant difference in treatment success, and health outcomes. The following interventions were emphasized: SMS text messaging interventions (8/27, 30%), medicine reminders (6/27, 22%), and web-based direct observation therapy (9/27, 33%). Digital health technology significantly promoted disease management among individuals and health care professionals. However, only a few studies addressed 2-way communication therapies, such as interactive SMS text messaging and feedback systems.ConclusionsThis scoping review classified studies on DHIs for patients with TB and demonstrated their potential for the self-management of TB. DHIs are still being developed, and evidence on the impact of digital technologies on enhancing TB treatment adherence remains limited. However, it is necessary to encourage patients' participation in TB treatment and self-management through bidirectional communication. We emphasize the importance of developing a communication system.
| S-EPMC10718480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare is responsible for 4% to 10% of carbon emissions worldwide, of which 22% is related to transport. Telemedicine emerged as a potential solution to reduce the footprint, for example, by reducing travel. However, a need to understand which variables to include in carbon footprint estimations in telemedicine limits our understanding of the beneficial impact telemedicine might have on our environment. This paper aims to systematically assess the reported carbon footprint and include variables assessed by the literature, comparing telemedicine with usual care.MethodsThe systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines in PubMed, Medline, Embase and Scopus. A quality assessment was performed using a transparency checklist for carbon footprint calculators. Carbon emissions were evaluated based on four categories, including patient travel, and streamlined life cycle assessment (LCA) for assessing included variables relevant to telemedicine.ResultsWe included 33 articles from 1117 records for analysis. The average transparency score was 38% (range 18%-68%). The median roundtrip travel distance for each patient was 131 km (interquartile range [IQR]: 60.8-351), or 25.6 kgCO2 (IQR: 10.6-105.6) emissions. There is high variance among included variables. Saved emissions are structurally underestimated by not including external factors such as a streamlined LCA.ConclusionsTelemedicine aids in reducing emissions, with travel distance being the most significant contributor. Additionally, we recommend accounting for the LCA since it highlights important nuances. This review furthers the debate on assessing carbon footprint savings due to telemedicine.
| S-EPMC11320403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile many digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been found to be efficacious, patient engagement with DMHIs has increasingly emerged as a concern for implementation in real-world clinical settings. To address engagement, we must first understand what standard engagement levels are in the context of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and how these compare with other treatments.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to examine the state of reporting on intervention engagement in RCTs of mobile app-based interventions intended to treat symptoms of depression. We sought to identify what engagement metrics are and are not routinely reported as well as what the metrics that are reported reflect about standard engagement levels.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of 7 databases to identify studies meeting our eligibility criteria, namely, RCTs that evaluated use of a mobile app-based intervention in adults, for which depressive symptoms were a primary outcome of interest. We then extracted 2 kinds of information from each article: intervention details and indices of DMHI engagement. A 5-element framework of minimum necessary DMHI engagement reporting was derived by our team and guided our data extraction. This framework included (1) recommended app use as communicated to participants at enrollment and, when reported, app adherence criteria; (2) rate of intervention uptake among those assigned to the intervention; (3) level of app use metrics reported, specifically number of uses and time spent using the app; (4) duration of app use metrics (ie, weekly use patterns); and (5) number of intervention completers.ResultsDatabase searching yielded 2083 unique records. Of these, 22 studies were eligible for inclusion. Only 64% (14/22) of studies included in this review specified rate of intervention uptake. Level of use metrics was only reported in 59% (13/22) of the studies reviewed. Approximately one-quarter of the studies (5/22, 23%) reported duration of use metrics. Only half (11/22, 50%) of the studies reported the number of participants who completed the app-based components of the intervention as intended or other metrics related to completion. Findings in those studies reporting metrics related to intervention completion indicated that between 14.4% and 93.0% of participants randomized to a DMHI condition completed the intervention as intended or according to a specified adherence criteria.ConclusionsFindings suggest that engagement was underreported and widely varied. It was not uncommon to see completion rates at or below 50% (11/22) of those participants randomized to a treatment condition or to simply see completion rates not reported at all. This variability in reporting suggests a failure to establish sufficient reporting standards and limits the conclusions that can be drawn about level of engagement with DMHIs. Based on these findings, the 5-element framework applied in this review may be useful as a minimum necessary standard for DMHI engagement reporting.
| S-EPMC9617183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDisease prevention is a central aspect of primary care practice and is comprised of primary (eg, vaccinations), secondary (eg, screenings), tertiary (eg, chronic condition monitoring), and quaternary (eg, prevention of overmedicalization) levels. Despite rapid digital transformation of primary care practices, digital health interventions (DHIs) in preventive care have yet to be systematically evaluated.ObjectiveThis review aimed to identify and describe the scope and use of current DHIs for preventive care in primary care settings.MethodsA scoping review to identify literature published from 2014 to 2020 was conducted across multiple databases using keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms covering primary care professionals, prevention and care management, and digital health. A subgroup analysis identified relevant studies conducted in US primary care settings, excluding DHIs that use the electronic health record (EHR) as a retrospective data capture tool. Technology descriptions, outcomes (eg, health care performance and implementation science), and study quality as per Oxford levels of evidence were abstracted.ResultsThe search yielded 5274 citations, of which 1060 full-text articles were identified. Following a subgroup analysis, 241 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily examined DHIs among health information technologies, including EHRs (166/241, 68.9%), clinical decision support (88/241, 36.5%), telehealth (88/241, 36.5%), and multiple technologies (154/241, 63.9%). DHIs were predominantly used for tertiary prevention (131/241, 54.4%). Of the core primary care functions, comprehensiveness was addressed most frequently (213/241, 88.4%). DHI users were providers (205/241, 85.1%), patients (111/241, 46.1%), or multiple types (89/241, 36.9%). Reported outcomes were primarily clinical (179/241, 70.1%), and statistically significant improvements were common (192/241, 79.7%). Results were summarized across the following 5 topics for the most novel/distinct DHIs: population-centered, patient-centered, care access expansion, panel-centered (dashboarding), and application-driven DHIs. The quality of the included studies was moderate to low.ConclusionsPreventive DHIs in primary care settings demonstrated meaningful improvements in both clinical and nonclinical outcomes, and across user types; however, adoption and implementation in the US were limited primarily to EHR platforms, and users were mainly clinicians receiving alerts regarding care management for their patients. Evaluations of negative results, effects on health disparities, and many other gaps remain to be explored.
| S-EPMC8817213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLifestyle-related diseases caused by inadequate diet and physical activity cause premature death, loss of healthy life years, and increased health care costs. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies indicate that preventive digital health interventions (P-DHIs) can be effective in preventing these health problems, but the results of these studies are mixed. Adoption studies have identified multiple factors related to individuals and the context in which they live that complicate the transfer of positive results from RCT studies to practical use. Implementation studies have revealed barriers to the large-scale implementation of mobile health (mHealth) solutions in general. Consequently, there is no clear path to delivering predictable outcomes from P-DHIs and achieving effectiveness when scaling up interventions to reduce health problems in society.ObjectiveThis research aimed to expand our understanding of how to increase the outcome predictability of P-DHIs by focusing on physical activity and diet behaviors and amplify our understanding of how to improve effectiveness in large-scale implementations.MethodsThe research objective was pursued through a multidisciplinary scoping review. This scoping review used the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) as a guide. A comprehensive search of Web of Science and PubMed limited to English-language journal articles published before January 2022 was conducted. Google Scholar was used for hand searches. Information systems theory was used to identify key constructs influencing outcomes of IT in general. Public health and mHealth literature were used to identify factors influencing the adoption of, outcomes from, and implementation of P-DHIs. Finally, the P-DHI investment model was developed based on information systems constructs and factors from the public health and mHealth literature.ResultsIn total, 203 articles met the eligibility criteria. The included studies used a variety of methodologies, including literature reviews, interviews, surveys, and RCT studies. The P-DHI investment model suggests which constructs and related factors should be emphasized to increase the predictability of P-DHI outcomes and improve the effectiveness of large-scale implementations.ConclusionsThe research suggests that outcome predictability could be improved by including descriptions of the constructs and factors in the P-DHI investment model when reporting from empirical studies. Doing so would increase our understanding of when and why P-DHIs succeed or fail. The effectiveness of large-scale implementations may be improved by using the P-DHI investment model to evaluate potential difficulties and possibilities in implementing P-DHIs to create better environments for their use before investing in them and when designing and implementing them. The cost-effectiveness of large-scale implementations is unknown; implementations are far more complicated than just downloading and using apps, and there is uncertainty accompanying implementations given the lack of coordinated control over the constructs and factors that influence the outcome.
| S-EPMC10401197 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesComprehensively map and summarize digital health initiatives for the elderly and caregivers.MethodsScoping review between April and May 2022 based on Joanna Briggs methodology. Databases used included PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science, along with grey literature and hand searches. Two reviewers independently conducted screening and eligibility phases, with a third resolving disagreements. Data were thematically analyzed.ResultsThe review included 421 documents. Most documents were published between 2013 and 2022, with a recent increase. Most studies, originating from high-income countries, focused on home applications and were mainly in the testing and validation stages. Telephones and computers were the predominant devices. Health objectives included monitoring, prevention, and treatment, with interventions utilizing directed communication and personal health monitoring for individuals, and telemedicine and decision support for healthcare providers.ConclusionIncreasing integration of technology in older adults' lives, along with their increasing proficiency, is driving a significant rise in digital health interventions. Despite this growth, further research in middle- and low-income countries, for caregivers and evaluating effectiveness and feasibility of these technological interventions is needed.
| S-EPMC11693459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigital health interventions (DHIs) are a central focus of health care transformation efforts, yet their uptake in practice continues to fall short of their potential. In order to achieve their desired outcomes and impact, DHIs need to reach their target population and need to be used. Many factors can rapidly intersect between this dynamic of users and interventions. The application of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) can facilitate the systematic understanding and explanation of the complex interactions between users, practices, technology, and health system factors that underpin research questions. There remains a gap in our understanding of how TMFs have been applied to guide the evaluation of DHIs with real-world health system operations.ObjectiveThis study aims to map TMFs used in studies to guide the evaluation of DHIs. The objectives are to (1) describe the TMFs and the constructs they target, (2) identify how TMFs have been prospectively used (ie, their roles) in primary studies to evaluate DHIs, and (3) to reflect on the relevance and utility of our findings for knowledge users.MethodsThis scoping review was conducted in partnership with knowledge users using an integrated knowledge translation approach. We included papers (eg, reports; empirical quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; conference proceedings; and dissertations) if primary insights resulting from the application of TMFs were presented. Any type of DHI was eligible. Papers published from 2000 and onward were mainly identified from the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (Ovid), EBM Reviews (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid).ResultsA total of 156 studies published between 2000 and 2022 were included. A total of 68 distinct TMFs were identified across 85 individual studies. In more than half (85/156, 55%) of the included studies, 1 of following 6 prevailing TMFs were reported: Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (n=39); the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework (n=17); the Technology of Acceptance Model (n=16); the Unified Theory on Acceptance and Use of Technology (n=12); the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (n=10); and Normalization Process Theory (n=9). The most common intended roles of the 6 TMFs were to inform data collection (n=86), to inform data analysis (n=69), and to identify key constructs that may serve as barriers and facilitators (n=52).ConclusionsAs TMFs are most often reported to be applied to support data collection and analysis, researchers should consider more clearly synthesizing key insights as practical use cases to both increase the relevance and digestibility of their findings. There is also a need to adapt or develop guidelines for better reporting DHIs and the use of TMFs to guide evaluation. Hence, it would contribute to ensuring ongoing technology transformation efforts are evidence and theory informed rather than anecdotally driven.
| S-EPMC10877497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigital health interventions (DHIs) are increasingly being adopted globally to address various public health issues. DHIs can be categorized according to four main types of technology: mobile based, web based, telehealth, and electronic health records. In 2006, Norman and Skinner introduced the eHealth literacy model, encompassing six domains of skills and abilities (basic, health, information, scientific, media, and computer) needed to effectively understand, process, and act on health-related information. Little is known about whether these domains are assessed or accounted for in DHIs.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore how DHIs assess and evaluate the eHealth literacy model, describe which health conditions are addressed, and which technologies are used.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of the literature on DHIs, based on randomized controlled trial design and reporting the assessment of any domain of the eHealth literacy model. MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. A duplicate selection and data extraction process was performed; we charted the results according to the country of origin, health condition, technology used, and eHealth literacy domain.ResultsWe identified 131 unique DHIs conducted in 26 different countries between 2001 and 2020. Most DHIs were conducted in English-speaking countries (n=81, 61.8%), delivered via the web (n=68, 51.9%), and addressed issues related to noncommunicable diseases (n=57, 43.5%) or mental health (n=26, 19.8%). None of the interventions assessed all six domains of the eHealth literacy model. Most studies focused on the domain of health literacy (n=96, 73.2%), followed by digital (n=19, 14.5%), basic and media (n=4, 3%), and information and scientific literacy (n=1, 0.7%). Of the 131 studies, 7 (5.3%) studies covered both health and digital literacy.ConclusionsAlthough many selected DHIs assessed health or digital literacy, no studies comprehensively evaluated all domains of the eHealth literacy model; this evidence might be overlooking important factors that can mediate or moderate the effects of these interventions. Future DHIs should comprehensively assess the eHealth literacy model while developing or evaluating interventions to understand how and why interventions can be effective.
| S-EPMC8212628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigital interventions offer a solution to address the high demand for mental health promotion, especially when facing physical contact restrictions or lacking accessibility. Engagement with digital interventions is critical for their effectiveness; however, retaining users' engagement throughout the intervention is challenging. It remains unclear what strategies facilitate engagement with digital interventions that target mental health promotion.ObjectiveOur aim is to conduct a scoping review to investigate user engagement strategies and methods to evaluate engagement with digital interventions that target mental health promotion in adults.MethodsThis scoping review adheres to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for scoping reviews. The search was conducted in 7 electronic databases from inception to April 2020. The inclusion criteria for studies were as follows: adult (aged ≥18 years) users of digital interventions for mental health promotion from the general population; any digital intervention for mental health promotion; and user engagement strategies described in the intervention design. We extracted the following data items: study characteristics, digital intervention (type and engagement strategy), evaluation of engagement strategy (method and result specifying whether the strategy was effective at facilitating engagement), and features of engagement (extent of use and subjective experience of users).ResultsA total of 2766 studies were identified, of which 16 (0.58%) met the inclusion criteria. The 16 studies included randomized controlled trials (6/16, 37%), studies analyzing process data (5/16, 31%), observational studies (3/16, 19%), and qualitative studies (2/16, 13%). The digital interventions for mental health promotion were either web based (12/16, 75%) or mobile app based (4/16, 25%). The engagement strategies included personalized feedback about intervention content or users' mental health status; guidance regarding content and progress through e-coaching; social forums, and interactivity with peers; content gamification; reminders; and flexibility and ease of use. These engagement strategies were deemed effective based on qualitative user feedback or responses on questionnaires or tools (4/16, 25%), usability data (5/16, 31%), or both (7/16, 44%). Most studies identified personalized support in the form of e-coaching, peer support through a social platform, personalized feedback, or joint videoconference sessions as an engaging feature.ConclusionsPersonalized support during the intervention, access to social support, and personalized feedback seem to promote engagement with digital interventions for mental health promotion. These findings need to be interpreted with caution because the included studies were heterogeneous, had small sample sizes, and typically did not address engagement as the primary outcome. Despite the importance of user engagement for the effectiveness of digital interventions, this field has not yet received much attention. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of different strategies required to facilitate user engagement in digital interventions for mental health promotion.
| S-EPMC8726056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionOlder adults with hip fracture often require extensive post-surgery care across multiple sectors, making follow-up care even more important to ensure an ideal recovery. With the increased adoption of technology, patient-clinician digital health interventions can potentially improve post-surgery outcomes of hip fracture patients by helping them and their caregivers better understand the various aspects of their care, post-hip fracture surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine the available literature on the impact of hip fracture-specific, patient-clinician digital health interventions on patient outcomes and health care delivery processes. We also aimed to identify the barriers and enablers to the uptake and implementation of these technologies and to provide strategies for improved use of these digital health interventions.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review following the six stages of Arksey and O'Malley's framework and following the PRISMA-ScR reporting format. Searches were conducted in five databases. In addition to hand searching for relevant studies from the references of all included studies, we also conducted a grey literature search to identify relevant primary studies. Screening of titles and abstracts as well as full texts were performed independently by two reviewers. Two reviewers also performed the data extraction of the included studies.ResultsAfter screening 3,638 records, 20 articles met the criteria and 1 article was identified through hand searching. Various patient-clinician digital health interventions were described including telehealth /telerehabilitation programs (n = 6), care transition /follow-up interventions (n = 5), online resources (n = 2), and wearable devices /sensor monitoring (n = 1). Outcomes were varied and included functional status, gait/mobility, quality of life, psychological factors, satisfaction, survival/complications, caregiver outcomes, compliance, technology-user interactions, and feedback on the use of the digital health interventions. For clinicians, a key barrier to the use of the digital health interventions was the acceptability of the technology. However, the usefulness of the digital health intervention by clinicians was seen as both a barrier and an enabler. For patients and caregivers, all the themes were seen as both a barrier and an enabler depending on the study. These themes included: 1) availability and access, 2) usability, 3) knowledge and skills, 4) acceptability, and 5) usefulness of the digital health intervention.ConclusionMany behavioural factors affect the use of patient-clinician digital health interventions. However, a specific attention should be focused on the acceptability of the technology by the clinicians to encourage uptake of the digital health interventions. The results of this scoping review can help to better understand the factors that may be targeted to increase the use of these technologies by clinicians, patients, and caregivers.
| S-EPMC10546736 | biostudies-literature