RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Monitoring health and care needs through the use of telehealthcare devices has been proposed to help alleviate funding concerns in a climate of limited budgets. As well as improving cost effectiveness, such an approach could be used to help individuals live at home for longer. In practice however, these devices often go unused. A qualitative study was carried out to determine the barriers to uptake of these devices from both the perspective of the end user and from key players in the healthcare supply chain. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used involving focus groups and interviews. Two UK-based focus groups were held with users and potential users, to assess their views on the wide array of devices available. 27 individuals were involved in the groups, all over the age of 60. Additionally 27 telephone interviews were conducted with key supply chain players to ascertain their views on the barriers to uptake of these devices. A semi-structured interview guide was used. All data were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Users were generally unaware of the wide array of devices available and when shown a selection, were often unclear as to their purpose. The interviews revealed extensive barriers to uptake due to lack of awareness, unfamiliar terminology, complex supply routes and costs, resistance from professionals to device usage and lack of expertise. CONCLUSIONS: Public and professional awareness campaigns are required with appropriate funding mechanisms for users to gain access to devices. The numerous barriers identified require systematically addressing, so that device usage is better promoted, enabling individuals to live at home successfully for longer.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There are many telehealthcare devices currently available ranging from personal alarms, automated pill dispensers and fall detectors through to monitoring devices for blood sugar, blood pressure and heart rate. Many devices remain unused once acquired or shortly after a period of initial use. METHODS: The study used a qualitative design involving focus groups and interviews. End users' opinions of telehealthcare devices were examined through focus groups along with the views of market experts and key supply chain players through telephone interviews to ascertain their views on the devices. The data were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Amongst the wide range of user issues associated with telehealthcare devices two themes merited particular attention: design characteristics and the lack of focus on end-user needs. Our findings suggested that few telehealthcare devices appear to be developed based on the principles of user-centred design. Consequently, many were non-intuitive to use, with the majority of the focus group participants not recognising the purpose of the devices from their appearance alone. CONCLUSIONS: Greater input from real end-users rather than "proxy" users such as carers, professional users or technologists is required when developing telehealthcare devices or systems. Design should be focussed on intuitive use to enable the user to successfully achieve what is required from the devices. This may require the existing supplier-driven market focus to be challenged, but could improve the contribution of technology to improving healthcare.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a co-ordinated programme of geriatric assessment and multidisciplinary home-based rehabilitation reduces disability and prevents non-elective hospital readmission in high-risk elderly patients. DESIGN: Nested case-control study comparing usual post-discharge care versus usual care plus a comprehensive geriatric assessment and home-based rehabilitation service, comprising nursing, occupational therapy and physiotherapy with geriatric medical review. Patients were >or=65 years with >or=2 non-elective hospital admissions within the previous 12 months. Disability was assessed using the 100-point Barthel index and Nottingham extended activities of daily living (EADL) score. Non-elective hospital admissions were recorded over 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: We studied 84 patients; 56 receiving the new service were matched to 28 controls. Intervention subjects received a median of 19 h [interquartile range (IQR) (7,35)] rehabilitation over 19 [IQR (6,42)] domiciliary visits. At 3 months, there was improvement in median Barthel and Nottingham EADL scores in the intervention group of 3 and 2 points, respectively, compared with reductions in controls of 3 and 6 points (both P<0.001, changes in intervention group versus controls); similar differences persisted in survivors at 12 months. There was a non-significant trend for reduction in the proportion of patients with further non-elective hospital admission in the intervention group (36/56, 64%) compared with controls (21/28, 75%; OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.34, 1.46). CONCLUSIONS: A co-ordinated programme of geriatric assessment and multidisciplinary home-based rehabilitation reduced disability in elderly patients at high risk for non-elective hospital admission. Further research is required to determine whether this approach can reduce the need for hospital admission.

Asunto(s)