Analysis of Barriers to the Deployment of Health Information Systems: a Stakeholder Perspective

© 2018 The Author(s). This paper argues that the cross-analysis of barriers with stakeholders provides a richer picture than analyzing the barriers on their own, as most of the literature in this area does. To test this hypothesis, we used the data from 33 interviews across 19 different types of stakeholders that were involved in a telemedicine system for the Chronically-ill Patient. Our findings show encouraging results. For instance, it was found that the group of stakeholders who are directly related to the governance and policy-making identified most of the barriers. This finding may imply that this group is more aware of the challenges when implementing HIS, or it may suggest that this group poses more resistance due to the current economic and Organizational models in health care. It was also found that some barriers are cited by all stakeholders whereas others not, suggesting that some barriers may be more relevant than others

Developing a model for understanding patient collection of observations of daily living: a qualitative meta-synthesis of the Project HealthDesign program

We conducted a meta-synthesis of five different studies that developed, tested, and implemented new technologies for the purpose of collecting Observations of Daily Living (ODL). From this synthesis, we developed a model to explain user motivation as it relates to ODL collection. We describe this model that includes six factors that motivate patients’ collection of ODL data: usability, illness experience, relevance of ODLs, information technology infrastructure, degree of burden, and emotional activation. We show how these factors can act as barriers or facilitators to the collection of ODL data and how interacting with care professionals and sharing ODL data may also influence ODL collection, health-related awareness, and behavior change. The model we developed and used to explain ODL collection can be helpful to researchers and designers who study and develop new, personal health technologies to empower people to improve their health

Developing the Evidence Base to Inform Best Practice: A Scoping Study of Breast and Cervical Cancer Reviews in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

<div><p>Background</p><p>Breast and cervical cancers have emerged as major global health challenges and disproportionately lead to excess morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) when compared to high-income countries. The objective of this paper was to highlight key findings, recommendations, and gaps in research and practice identified through a scoping study of recent reviews in breast and cervical cancer in LMICs.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We conducted a scoping study based on the six-stage framework of Arskey and O’Malley. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Reviews, and CINAHL with the following inclusion criteria: 1) published between 2005-February 2015, 2) focused on breast or cervical cancer 3) focused on LMIC, 4) review article, and 5) published in English.</p><p>Results</p><p>Through our systematic search, 63 out of the 94 identified cervical cancer reviews met our selection criteria and 36 of the 54 in breast cancer. Cervical cancer reviews were more likely to focus upon prevention and screening, while breast cancer reviews were more likely to focus upon treatment and survivorship. Few of the breast cancer reviews referenced research and data from LMICs themselves; cervical cancer reviews were more likely to do so. Most reviews did not include elements of the PRISMA checklist.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Overall, a limited evidence base supports breast and cervical cancer control in LMICs. Further breast and cervical cancer prevention and control studies are necessary in LMICs.</p></div