Nurses’ and community support workers’ experience of telehealth: a longitudinal case study

BMC Health Services Research

Malcolm Clarke¹  Urvashi Sharma¹ 

[1] Department of Computer Science, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK

关键词: Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA);    Community support workers;    Nurses;    Telehealth;    Experience of threat;   

Others  :  1132747
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-164

 received in 2013-12-30, accepted in 2014-04-07,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Introduction of telehealth into the healthcare setting has been recognised as a service that might be experienced as disruptive. This paper explores how this disruption is experienced.

Methods

In a longitudinal qualitative study, we conducted focus group discussions prior to and semi structured interviews post introduction of a telehealth service in Nottingham, U.K. with the community matrons, congestive heart failure nurses, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease nurses and community support workers that would be involved in order to elicit their preconceptions and reactions to the implementation.

Results

Users experienced disruption due to the implementation of telehealth as threatening. Three main factors add to the experience of threat and affect the decision to use the technology: change in clinical routines and increased workload; change in interactions with patients and fundamentals of face-to-face nursing work; and change in skills required with marginalisation of clinical expertise.

Conclusion

Since the introduction of telehealth can be experienced as threatening, managers and service providers should aim at minimising the disruption caused by taking the above factors on board. This can be achieved by employing simple yet effective measures such as: providing timely, appropriate and context specific training; provision of adequate technical support; and procedures that allow a balance between the use of telehealth and personal visit by nurses delivering care to their patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Sharma and Clarke; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Chau P, Hu P: Examining a model of information technology acceptance byindividual professionals: An exploratory study. J Mamage Inform Syst 2001, 18:191-229.
• [2]Chau P, Hu P: Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology: An empirical test of competing theories. Inform Manage 2002, 39:297-311.
• [3]Gagnon M, Duplantie J, Fortin J, Landry R: Implementing telehealth to support medical practice in rural/remote regions: What are the conditions for success? Implement Sci 2006., 1(18) doi:10.1186/1748-5908-1-18
• [4]May C, Gask L, Atkinson T, Ellis N, Mair F, Esmail A: Resisting and promoting new technologies in clinical practice: the case of telepsychiatry. Soc Sci Med 2001, 52:1889-1901.
• [5]May C, Harrison R, Macfarlane A, Williams T, Mair F, Wallace P: Why do telemedicine systems fail to normalize as stable models of service delivery? J Telemed Telecare 2003a, 9:S1:25-S1:26.
• [6]May C, Harrison R, Finch T, Macfarlane A, Mair F, Wallace P, Telemedicine adoption study group: Understanding the normalization of telemedicine services through qualitative evaluation. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003, 10:596-604.
• [7]May C, Finch T, Mair F, Mort M: Towards a wireless patient: Chronic illness, scarce care and technological innovation in the United Kingdom. Soc Sci Med 2005, 61:1485-1494.
• [8]Mair FS, May C, Finch T, Murray E, Anderson G, Sullivan F, O’Donnell C, Wallace P, Epstein O: Understanding the implementation and integration of e-health services. J Telemed Telecare 2007, 13(SUPPL. 1):36-37.
• [9]May C, Ellis NT: When protocols fail: technical evaluation, biomedical knowledge, and the social production of ‘facts’ about a telemedicine clinic. Soc Sci Med 2001, 53:989-1002.
• [10]Zanaboni P, Wootton R: Adoption of telemedicine: from pilot stage to routine delivery. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012., 12(1) doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-1
• [11]Heeks R, Davies A: Different approaches to information age reform. Reinventing government in the information age. London: Routledge; 2001.
• [12]Peddle K: Telehealth in context: Socio-technical barriers to telehealth use in labrador, canada. Comput Supported Coop Work 2007, 16:595-614.
• [13]Nicolini D: The work to make telemedicine work: a social and articulative view. Soc Sci Med 2006, 62:2754-2767.
• [14]Nicolini D: Stretching out and expanding work practices in time and space: The case of telemedicine. Hum Relat 2007, 60:889-920.
• [15]Nicolini D: Medical innovation as a process of translation: A case from the field of telemedicine. Brit J Manage 2010, 21:1011-1026.
• [16]Tjora AH, Scambler G: Square pegs in round holes: Information systems, hospitals and the significance of contextual awareness. Soc Sci Med 2009, 68:519-525.
• [17]Bhattacherjee A, Hikmet N: Physicians’ resistance toward healthcare information technology: A theoretical model and empirical test. Eur J Inform Syst 2007, 16:725-737.
• [18]Schermerhorn J, Hunt J, Osborn R: Organizational behaviour. 10th edition. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
• [19]Walter Z, Lopez MS: Physician acceptance of information technologies: Role of perceived threat to professional autonomy. Decis Support Syst 2008, 46:206-215.
• [20]Hu P, Chau P, Sheng O: Adoption of telemedicine technology by health care organizations: An exploratory study. J Org Comp Elect Com 2002, 12:197-221.
• [21]Nottingham City Council http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk webcite
• [22]Biggerstaff D, Thompson RA: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): A Qualitative Methodology of Choice in Healthcare Research. Qual Res Psychol 2008, 5:214-224. doi:10.1080/14780880802314304
• [23]Smith JA, Osborn M: Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Edited by Smith JA. London: Sage; 2008.
• [24]Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández JL, Beecham J, Hirani SP, Cartwright M, Rixon L, Beynon M, Rogers A, Bower P, Doll H, Fitzpatrick R, Steventon A, Bardsley M, Hendy J, Newman SP: Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Br Med J 2013, 346:f1035. doi:10.1136/bmj.f1035
• [25]Berg M: Implementing information systems in health care organizations: Myths and challenges. Int J Med Inform 2001, 64:143-156.
• [26]Lehoux P, Sicotte C, Denis J, Berg M, Lacroix A: The theory of use behind telemedicine: How compatible with physicians’ clinical routines? Soc Sci Med 2002, 54:889-904.
• [27]May C: Nursing work, nurses’ knowledge, and the subjectification of the patient. Sociol Health Ill 1992, 14:472-487.
• [28]May C: Subjectivity and culpability in the constitution of nurse-patient relationships. Int J Nurs Stud 1993, 30:181-192.
• [29]May C: The clinical encounter and the problem of context. Sociology 2007, 41:29-45.
• [30]May C, Allison G, Chapple A, Chew-Graham C, Dixon C, Gask L, Graham R, Rogers A, Ronald M: Framing the doctor-patient relationship in chronic illness: A comparative study of general practitioners’ accounts. Sociol Health Ill 2004, 26:135-158.
• [31]Sicotte C, Lehoux P: Teleconsultation: Rejected and Emerging Uses. Method Inform Med 2003, 42:451-457.
• [32]Gagnon M, Godin G, Gagné C, Fortin J, Lamothe L, Reinharz D, Coultier A: An adaptation of the theory of interpersonal behaviour to the study of telemedicine adoption by physicians. Int J Med Inform 2003, 71:103-115.