Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37494092›Full record

ArticleJMIR nursing2023

Underestimated Factors Regarding the Use of Technology in Daily Practice of Long-Term Care: Qualitative Study Among Health Care Professionals.

Sjors W M Groeneveld, Marjolein E M den Ouden, J E W C van Gemert-Pijnen, Rudolph M Verdaasdonk, Harmieke van Os-Medendorp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Sjors W M GroeneveldResearch Group Technology, Health & Care, School of Social Work, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3942-9691
Marjolein E M den OudenResearch Group Technology, Health & Care, School of Social Work, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7821-1578
J E W C van Gemert-PijnenCentre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Section of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6511-7240
Rudolph M VerdaasdonkTechMed Center, Health Technology Implementation, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3115-637X
Harmieke van Os-MedendorpResearch Group Smart Health, School of Health, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Deventer/Enschede, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3300-2101

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing life expectancy is resulting in a growing demand for long-term care; however, there is a shortage of qualified health care professionals (HCPs) to deliver it. If used optimally, technology can provide a solution to this challenge. HCPs play an important role in the use of technology in long-term care. However, technology influences several core aspects of the work that HCPs do, and it is therefore important to have a good understanding of their viewpoint regarding the use of technology in daily practice of long-term care.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the factors that HCPs consider as relevant for using technology in daily practice of long-term care.

methodsIn this qualitative study, 11 focus groups were organized with 73 HCPs. The focus group discussions were guided by an innovative game, which was specifically developed for this study. The content of the game was categorized into 4 categories: health care technology and me; health care technology, the patient, and me; health care technology, the organization, and me; and facilitating conditions. The perspectives of HCPs about working with technology were discussed based on this game. The focus groups were recorded and transcribed, followed by an inductive thematic analysis using ATLAS.ti 9x (ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH).

resultsOverall, 2 main domain summaries were developed from the data: technology should improve the quality of care and acceptance and use of technology in care. The first factor indicates the need for tailored and personalized care and balance between human contact and technology. The second factor addresses several aspects regarding working with technology such as trusting technology, learning to work with technology, and collaboration with colleagues.

conclusionsHCPs are motivated to use technology in daily practice of long-term care when it adds value to the quality of care and there is sufficient trust, expertise, and collaboration with colleagues. Their perspectives need to be considered as they play a crucial part in the successful use of technology, transcending their role as an actor in implementation. On the basis of the findings from this study, we recommend focusing on developing technology for situations where both efficiency and quality of care can be improved; redefining the roles of HCPs and the impact of technology hereon; involving HCPs in the design process of technology to enable them to link it to their daily practice; and creating ambassadors in care teams who are enthusiastic about working with technology and can support and train their colleagues.

Indexed as

acceptanceadoptioncompetenciesdigital healtheHealthhealth care professionalshealth technologyimplementationnursenurse assistant

Identifiers

PMID37494092
PMCPMC10413233

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.