Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: A systematic review

Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 4-12

  Scott Kruse, Clemens ^a   Karem, Priyanka ^a   Shifflett, Kelli ^a   Vegi, Lokesh ^a   Ravi, Karuna ^a   Brooks, Matthew ^a  

^a TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

adoption; Barriers; implementation; mHealth; telemedicine

Indexed keywords

AGE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; GLOBAL HEALTH; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; MASS COMMUNICATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; SOCIOECONOMICS; TELEMEDICINE;

AGE FACTORS; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; GLOBAL HEALTH; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; TELEMEDICINE;

EID: 85040461046     PISSN: 1357633X     EISSN: 17581109     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1357633X16674087     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. World Health Organization (WHO). Telemedicine: opportunities and developments in Member States: report on the second global survey on eHealth, Global Observatory for eHealth seires – Volume 2. NLM classification W 26.5. ISBN 9789241564144. ISSN 2220-5462. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010.
2. Russo JE, McCool RR, Davies L. VA telemedicine: an analysis of cost and time savings. Telemed J E Health 2016; 22(3): 209–215.
3. Hatcher-Martin J, Anderson E, Factor S. Patient acceptance and potential cost-savings of teleneurology in an academic outpatient movement disorders practice (P1.022). Neurology 2016; 86(Suppl 16): P1–022.
4. Cota A, Tarchala M, Parent-Harvey C, Review of 5.5 years’ experience using e-mail-based telemedicine to deliver orthopedic care to remote communities. Telemed J E Health 2017; 23(1): 37–40.
5. Amoakoh-Coleman M, Borgstein AB, Sondaal SF, Effectiveness of mHealth interventions targeting health care workers to improve pregnancy outcomes in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18(8): e226–e226.
6. Hannan J, Brooten D, Youngblut JM, Comparing mothers’ postpartum concerns in two clinical trials 18 years apart. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 2016; 28(11): 604–611.
7. MacFarlane A, Murphy AW, Clerkin P. Telemedicine services in the Republic of Ireland: an evolving policy context. Health Policy 2006; 76(3): 245–258.
8. Zanaboni P, Wootton R. Adoption of telemedicine: from pilot stage to routine delivery. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012; 12(1): 1–1.
9. Molfenter T, Boyle M, Holloway D, Trends in telemedicine use in addiction treatment. Addict Sci Clin Pract 2015; 10(1): 1–1.
10. Petersen C, DeMuro P. Legal and regulatory considerations associated with use of patient-generated health data from social media and mobile health (mHealth) devices. Appl Clin Inform 2014; 6(1): 16–26.
11. Kontos E, Blake KD, Chou WY, Predictors of eHealth usage: insights on the digital divide from the Health Information National Trends Survey 2012. J Med Internet Res 2014; 16(7): e172–e172.
12. Levine M, Richardson JE, Granieri E, Novel telemedicine technologies in geriatric chronic non cancer pain: primary care providers’ perspectives. Pain Medicine 2014; 15(2): 206–213.
13. Adler G, Pritchett LR, Kauth MR, A pilot project to improve access to telepsychotherapy at rural clinics. Telemed J E Health 2014; 20(1): 83–85.
14. Kahn JM, Cicero BD, Wallace DJ, Adoption of intensive care unit telemedicine in the United States. Crit Care Med 2014; 42(2): 362–362.
15. Rutledge CM, Haney T, Bordelon M, Telehealth: preparing advanced practice nurses to address healthcare needs in rural and underserved populations. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh 2014; 11(1): 1–9.
16. LeRouge C, Garfield MJ. Crossing the telemedicine chasm: have the US barriers to widespread adoption of telemedicine been significantly reduced? Int J Environ Res Publ Health 2013; 10(12): 6472–6484.
17. Mohr DC, Burns MN, Schueller SM, Behavioral intervention technologies: evidence review and recommendations for future research in mental health. Gen Hosp Psychiat 2013; 35(4): 332–338.
18. Cherney LR, van Vuuren S. Telerehabilitation, virtual therapists, and acquired neurologic speech and language disorders. Semin Speech Lang 2012; 33(3): 243–243.
19. Silva GS, Farrell S, Shandra E, The status of telestroke in the United States a survey of currently active stroke telemedicine programs. Stroke 2012; 43(8): 2078–2085.
20. Young LB, Chan PS, Cram P. Staff acceptance of tele-ICU coverage: a systematic review. Chest 2011; 139(2): 279–288.
21. Ross J, Stevenson F, Lau R, Exploring the challenges of implementing e-health: a protocol for an update of a systematic review of reviews. BMJ Open 2015; 5(4): e006773–e006773.
22. Plaete J, Verloigne M, Crombez G, What do general practitioners think about an online tailored self-regulation programme for primary prevention. European Health Psychologist 2014; 16(S): 889–889.
23. Sanders C, Rogers A, Bowen R, Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12(1): 220–220.
24. Mair FS, May C, O’Donnell C, Factors that promote or inhibit the implementation of e-health systems: an explanatory systematic review. B World Health Organ 2012; 90(5): 357–364.
25. May CR, Finch TL, Cornford J, Integrating telecare for chronic disease management in the community: what needs to be done? BMC Health Serv Res 2011; 11(1): 1–1.
26. Plaete J, Crombez G, DeSmet A, What do general practitioners think about an online self-regulation programme for health promotion? Focus group interviews. BMC Fam Pract 2015; 16(1): 1–1.
27. Ronda MC, Dijkhorst-Oei LT, Rutten GE. Reasons and barriers for using a patient portal: survey among patients with diabetes mellitus. J Med Internet Res 2014; 16(11): e263–e263.
28. Robben SH, Perry M, Huisjes M, Implementation of an innovative web-based conference table for community-dwelling frail older people, their informal caregivers and professionals: a process evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12(1): 1–1.
29. Van Deursen AJ, van Dijk JA. Internet skills performance tests: are people ready for eHealth? J Med Internet Res 2011; 13(2): e35–e35.
30. Stroetmann KA, Artmann J, Stroetmann V. Developing national eHealth infrastructures–results and lessons from Europe. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2011; 2011: 1347–1347.
31. Schwarz F, Ward J, Willcock S. E-Health readiness in outback communities: an exploratory study. Rural Remote Health 2014; 14: 2871–2871.
32. Lycett K, Wittert G, Gunn J, The challenges of real-world implementation of web-based shared care software: the HopSCOTCH Shared-Care Obesity Trial in Children. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2014; 14(1): 1–1.
33. Sinclair C, Holloway K, Riley G, Online mental health resources in rural Australia: clinician perceptions of acceptability. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15(9): e193–e193.
34. Medhanyie AA, Little A, Yebyo H, Health workers’ experiences, barriers, preferences and motivating factors in using mHealth forms in Ethiopia. Hum Resour Health 2015; 13(2): 1–22.
35. Bigna JJ, Noubiap JJ, Plottel CS, Barriers to the implementation of mobile phone reminders in pediatric HIV care: a pre-trial analysis of the Cameroonian MORE CARE study. BMC Health Serv Res 2014; 14(1): 1–1.
36. Mohammadzadeh N, Safdari R, Rahimi A. Cancer care management through a mobile phone health approach: key considerations. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013; 14(9): 4961–4964.
37. El-Mahalli AA, El-Khafif SH, Al-Qahtani MF. Successes and challenges in the implementation and application of telemedicine in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2012; 9.
38. Scholl J, Syed-Abdul S, Ahmed LA. A case study of an EMR system at a large hospital in India: Challenges and strategies for successful adoption. J Biomed Inform 2011; 44(6): 958–967.
39. Benhamou PY. Improving diabetes management with electronic health records and patients’ health records. Diabetes Metab 2011; 37: S53–S56.
40. Kruse CS, Argueta DA, Lopez L, Patient and provider attitudes toward the use of patient portals for the management of chronic disease: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2015; 17(2): e40–e40.
41. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6(7): e1000097. DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097