Effectiveness of digital health interventions for chronic conditions management in European primary care settings: Systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Elisa Ambrosi , Elisabetta Mezzalira , Federica Canzan , Chiara Leardini , Giovanni Vita , Giulia Marini , Jessica Longhini
{"title":"Effectiveness of digital health interventions for chronic conditions management in European primary care settings: Systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Elisa Ambrosi ,&nbsp;Elisabetta Mezzalira ,&nbsp;Federica Canzan ,&nbsp;Chiara Leardini ,&nbsp;Giovanni Vita ,&nbsp;Giulia Marini ,&nbsp;Jessica Longhini","doi":"10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2025.105820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The past decade has seen rapid digitalization of healthcare, significantly transforming healthcare delivery. However, the impact of these technologies remains unclear, with notable gaps in evidence regarding their effectiveness, especially in primary care settings.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of digital health interventions versus interventions without digital components implemented over the last 10 years in European primary care settings for managing chronic diseases.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following Cochrane guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with <em>meta</em>-analysis. We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies on digital health interventions for chronic disease management in primary care settings in Europe, evaluating outcomes such as hospitalizations, quality of life, and clinical measures. Data extraction and quality assessment were independently conducted by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by a third author. The certainty of the evidence was judged according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 9829 records, 23 studies were included, with most studies conducted in the UK and Spain. The most investigated conditions were type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Interventions mainly focused on patient monitoring, self-care education, and digital communication tools. The risk of bias was low to moderate for most studies. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences between digital health interventions and usual care for hospitalizations, depressive symptoms, anxiety, HbA1c, diastolic blood pressure, weight, or quality of life, except for a small improvement in systolic blood pressure.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Digital health interventions have not yet demonstrated substantial benefits over traditional care for chronic disease management in European primary care. While some improvements were noted, particularly in systolic blood pressure, the impact remains limited. Further research is needed to enhance the effectiveness of digital health interventions, address current methodological limitations, and explore tailored approaches for both specific patient populations and multimorbid populations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54950,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Informatics","volume":"196 ","pages":"Article 105820"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386505625000371","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The past decade has seen rapid digitalization of healthcare, significantly transforming healthcare delivery. However, the impact of these technologies remains unclear, with notable gaps in evidence regarding their effectiveness, especially in primary care settings.

Objective

This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of digital health interventions versus interventions without digital components implemented over the last 10 years in European primary care settings for managing chronic diseases.

Methods

Following Cochrane guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis. We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies on digital health interventions for chronic disease management in primary care settings in Europe, evaluating outcomes such as hospitalizations, quality of life, and clinical measures. Data extraction and quality assessment were independently conducted by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by a third author. The certainty of the evidence was judged according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

From 9829 records, 23 studies were included, with most studies conducted in the UK and Spain. The most investigated conditions were type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Interventions mainly focused on patient monitoring, self-care education, and digital communication tools. The risk of bias was low to moderate for most studies. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences between digital health interventions and usual care for hospitalizations, depressive symptoms, anxiety, HbA1c, diastolic blood pressure, weight, or quality of life, except for a small improvement in systolic blood pressure.

Conclusion

Digital health interventions have not yet demonstrated substantial benefits over traditional care for chronic disease management in European primary care. While some improvements were noted, particularly in systolic blood pressure, the impact remains limited. Further research is needed to enhance the effectiveness of digital health interventions, address current methodological limitations, and explore tailored approaches for both specific patient populations and multimorbid populations.
欧洲初级保健机构慢性病管理的数字健康干预措施的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析
在过去的十年中,医疗保健数字化迅速发展,极大地改变了医疗保健服务。然而,这些技术的影响仍然不清楚,关于其有效性的证据存在明显差距,特别是在初级保健环境中。目的:本系统综述评估了过去10年欧洲初级保健机构在管理慢性病方面实施的数字健康干预措施与没有数字组件的干预措施的有效性。方法遵循Cochrane指南,采用meta分析进行系统评价。我们检索了多个随机对照试验数据库。纳入标准包括关于欧洲初级保健机构中慢性病管理的数字健康干预措施的研究,评估住院、生活质量和临床措施等结果。数据提取和质量评估由两位作者独立进行,差异由第三位作者解决。根据推荐、评估、发展和评价方法的分级来判断证据的确定性。结果从9829份记录中,包括23项研究,其中大多数研究在英国和西班牙进行。调查最多的是2型糖尿病和高血压。干预措施主要集中在患者监护、自我保健教育和数字通信工具上。大多数研究的偏倚风险为低至中等。荟萃分析显示,在住院治疗、抑郁症状、焦虑、糖化血红蛋白、舒张压、体重或生活质量方面,数字健康干预与常规护理之间没有显著差异,只有收缩压有轻微改善。结论:在欧洲初级保健中,数字健康干预措施尚未显示出比传统护理对慢性病管理的实质性益处。虽然有一些改善,特别是在收缩压方面,但影响仍然有限。需要进一步研究以提高数字卫生干预措施的有效性,解决当前方法的局限性,并为特定患者群体和多疾病人群探索量身定制的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Medical Informatics
International Journal of Medical Informatics 医学-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.10%
发文量
217
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: International Journal of Medical Informatics provides an international medium for dissemination of original results and interpretative reviews concerning the field of medical informatics. The Journal emphasizes the evaluation of systems in healthcare settings. The scope of journal covers: Information systems, including national or international registration systems, hospital information systems, departmental and/or physician''s office systems, document handling systems, electronic medical record systems, standardization, systems integration etc.; Computer-aided medical decision support systems using heuristic, algorithmic and/or statistical methods as exemplified in decision theory, protocol development, artificial intelligence, etc. Educational computer based programs pertaining to medical informatics or medicine in general; Organizational, economic, social, clinical impact, ethical and cost-benefit aspects of IT applications in health care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信