Premium
Factors affecting front line staff acceptance of telehealth technologies: a mixed‐method systematic review
Author(s) -
Brewster Liz,
Mountain Gail,
Wessels Bridgette,
Kelly Ciara,
Hawley Mark
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of advanced nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.948
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1365-2648
pISSN - 0309-2402
DOI - 10.1111/jan.12196
Subject(s) - telehealth , thematic analysis , focus group , data collection , nursing , qualitative research , medicine , inclusion (mineral) , credibility , psychology , medical education , telemedicine , health care , business , sociology , political science , social psychology , social science , law , marketing
Aim To synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence of front‐line staff acceptance of the use of telehealth technologies for the management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Heart Failure. Background The implementation of telehealth at scale is a governmental priority in countries including the UK, USA and Canada, but little research has been conducted to analyse the impact of implementation on front‐line nursing staff. Data sources Six relevant data bases were searched between 2000–2012. Design Mixed‐method systematic review including all study designs. Review methods Centre for Reviews and Dissemination approach with thematic analysis and narrative synthesis of results. Results Fourteen studies met the review inclusion criteria; 2 quantitative surveys, 2 mixed‐method studies and 10 using qualitative methods, including focus groups, interviews, document analysis and observations. Identified factors affecting staff acceptance centred on the negative impact of service change, staff–patient interaction, credibility and autonomy, and technical issues. Studies often contrasted staff and patient perspectives, and data about staff acceptance were collected as part of a wider study, rather than being the focus of data collection, meaning data about staff acceptance were limited. Conclusion If telehealth is to be implemented, studies indicate that the lack of acceptance of this new way of working may be a key barrier. However, recommendations have not moved beyond barrier identification to recognizing solutions that might be implemented by front‐line staff. Such solutions are imperative if future roll‐out of telehealth technologies is to be successfully achieved.