Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386423›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

The effects of digitalisation on health and social care work: a qualitative descriptive study of the perceptions of professionals and managers.

Anu-Marja Kaihlanen, Elina Laukka, Janna Nadav, Johanna Närvänen, Petra Saukkonen, Juha Koivisto, Tarja Heponiemi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anu-Marja KaihlanenFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland. anu.kaihlanen@thl.fi.
Elina LaukkaResearch Unit of Nursing Science and Health Management, University of Oulu, 90230, Oulu, Finland.
Janna NadavFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.
Johanna NärvänenDepartment of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Petra SaukkonenFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.
Juha KoivistoFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.
Tarja HeponiemiFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundToday, digitalisation is strongly present in health and social care, and it increasingly affects the organisation of work, work requirements, tasks and tools. Due to the constant change in work, up-to-date knowledge is needed about these micro-level effects of digitalisation and how professionals experience the effects in their work. Furthermore, even though managers play a key role in implementing new digital services, their perceptions of the effects of digitalisation and whether they match the views of professionals remain unknown. This study examined how health and social care professionals and managers perceive the effects of digitalisation on the work of professionals.

methodsWe used a qualitative approach and conducted eight semi-structured focus group interviews with health and social care professionals (n = 30) and 21 individual interviews with managers in 2020 in four health centres in Finland. The qualitative content analysis included both an inductive and a deductive approach.

resultsDigitalisation was perceived to have changed professionals' 1) workload and pace, 2) the field and nature of work, 3) work community communication and interaction, and 4) information flow and security. Both professionals and managers identified effects such as accelerated work, reduction in workload, constant learning of technical skills, complicated work due to vulnerable information systems, and reduction in face-to-face encounters. However, managers did not bring up all the effects that professionals considered important, such as the creation of new work tasks, increased and duplicated work, or insufficient time to get acquainted with the systems.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that some of the effects of digitalisation on professionals' work and changes in the workplace may receive too little or no recognition from managers. This increases the risk that the potential negative effects may be overlooked and that managers will adopt systems that do not support the work of professionals. To reach a common understanding of the effects of digitalisation, continuous discussions between employees and different management levels are required. This contributes to professionals' well-being and adaptation to changes, as well as the provision of quality health and social services.

Indexed as

Social SupportSocial WorkCommunicationFocus GroupsHumansQualitative ResearchChanging workDigital healthDigitalisation of workDigital services implementationDigital technologyFocus groupsHealth and social care professionalsInterviewManagers

Identifiers

PMID37386423
PMCPMC10311778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.