对应用于中低收入国家(LMICs)数字卫生干预措施(DHIs)的实施科学战略的改编系统性审查:对采用和利用的影响

Lynda Odoh, Obehi Aimiosior
{"title":"对应用于中低收入国家(LMICs)数字卫生干预措施(DHIs)的实施科学战略的改编系统性审查:对采用和利用的影响","authors":"Lynda Odoh, Obehi Aimiosior","doi":"10.12688/healthopenres.13512.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Post the COVID-19 pandemic and with rising connectivity, digital health Interventions (DHIs) are being leveraged by innovators in Low middle-income countries (LMICs), to address healthcare challenges. Despite huge investments, interventions are poorly utilised due to health systems complexities, limited digital readiness and socioeconomic factors. Evolving evidence suggests that implementation science strategies can play a significant role in reducing the complexities within the sociotechnical domains. This study aims to understand how implementation science strategies are being applied to patient-focused DHIs in LMICs, its impact on adoption and utilisation. Methods A triangulated search was conducted on five electronic databases using a pretested strategy. A heterogeneous range of study types on patient-focused DHIs was included to capture different research methodologies used to describe implementation. The screening was done by two reviewers using inclusion/exclusion criteria registered on PROSPERO. Quality was accessed using the JBI appraisal tool for case studies, the CASP quality assessment tool for systematic reviews and qualitative studies, and the ROBIN-I tool for quasi-experimental studies. Synthesis was by Popay et al's guidance on narrative synthesis. Results Eleven studies from eight countries met the inclusion criteria. Through the lens of the NASSS framework and the ERIC clusters, forty-five implementation science strategies out of seventy-three were identified of which only twenty-seven percent of included studies applied more than fifty percent of the identified strategies. Conclusions The trend revealed that DHIs with higher and strategic application patterns tackled more sociotechnical system complexities and experienced better adoption/ utilisation. For the basics, we identified four heavy weight favorability factors that should be considered when choosing implementation strategies in this context. Large scale randomised interventional studies are however recommended to further measure impact. PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023388786","PeriodicalId":396625,"journal":{"name":"Health Open Research","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adapted systematic review of implementation science strategies applied to digital health interventions (DHIs) in low middle income countries (LMICs): Impact on adoption and utilisation\",\"authors\":\"Lynda Odoh, Obehi Aimiosior\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/healthopenres.13512.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Post the COVID-19 pandemic and with rising connectivity, digital health Interventions (DHIs) are being leveraged by innovators in Low middle-income countries (LMICs), to address healthcare challenges. Despite huge investments, interventions are poorly utilised due to health systems complexities, limited digital readiness and socioeconomic factors. Evolving evidence suggests that implementation science strategies can play a significant role in reducing the complexities within the sociotechnical domains. This study aims to understand how implementation science strategies are being applied to patient-focused DHIs in LMICs, its impact on adoption and utilisation. Methods A triangulated search was conducted on five electronic databases using a pretested strategy. A heterogeneous range of study types on patient-focused DHIs was included to capture different research methodologies used to describe implementation. The screening was done by two reviewers using inclusion/exclusion criteria registered on PROSPERO. Quality was accessed using the JBI appraisal tool for case studies, the CASP quality assessment tool for systematic reviews and qualitative studies, and the ROBIN-I tool for quasi-experimental studies. Synthesis was by Popay et al's guidance on narrative synthesis. Results Eleven studies from eight countries met the inclusion criteria. Through the lens of the NASSS framework and the ERIC clusters, forty-five implementation science strategies out of seventy-three were identified of which only twenty-seven percent of included studies applied more than fifty percent of the identified strategies. Conclusions The trend revealed that DHIs with higher and strategic application patterns tackled more sociotechnical system complexities and experienced better adoption/ utilisation. For the basics, we identified four heavy weight favorability factors that should be considered when choosing implementation strategies in this context. Large scale randomised interventional studies are however recommended to further measure impact. PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023388786\",\"PeriodicalId\":396625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Open Research\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/healthopenres.13512.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/healthopenres.13512.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 COVID-19 大流行之后,随着连接性的不断提高,中低收入国家(LMIC)的创新者们正在利用数字医疗干预措施(DHIs)来应对医疗保健方面的挑战。尽管投资巨大,但由于卫生系统复杂、数字化准备程度有限以及社会经济因素,干预措施的利用率很低。不断发展的证据表明,实施科学战略可在降低社会技术领域的复杂性方面发挥重要作用。本研究旨在了解在低收入国家如何将实施科学策略应用于以患者为中心的数字医疗基础设施,以及该策略对采用和使用的影响。方法 采用预先测试的策略在五个电子数据库中进行了三角搜索。其中包括以患者为中心的直接住院倡议的各种研究类型,以了解用于描述实施情况的不同研究方法。由两名审稿人使用 PROSPERO 上登记的纳入/排除标准进行筛选。对案例研究采用 JBI 评估工具,对系统综述和定性研究采用 CASP 质量评估工具,对准实验研究采用 ROBIN-I 工具。综述采用 Popay 等人的叙事综述指南。结果 来自 8 个国家的 11 项研究符合纳入标准。通过 NASSS 框架和 ERIC 群组的视角,在 73 项研究中确定了 45 项实施科学战略,其中只有 27% 的纳入研究应用了超过 50% 的确定战略。结论 这一趋势表明,具有更高战略应用模式的设计健康指标能够解决更多社会技术系统的复杂问题,并得到更好的采纳/利用。在此基础上,我们确定了在选择实施策略时应考虑的四个重要有利因素。不过,我们建议开展大规模随机干预研究,以进一步衡量其影响。PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42023388786
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adapted systematic review of implementation science strategies applied to digital health interventions (DHIs) in low middle income countries (LMICs): Impact on adoption and utilisation
Background Post the COVID-19 pandemic and with rising connectivity, digital health Interventions (DHIs) are being leveraged by innovators in Low middle-income countries (LMICs), to address healthcare challenges. Despite huge investments, interventions are poorly utilised due to health systems complexities, limited digital readiness and socioeconomic factors. Evolving evidence suggests that implementation science strategies can play a significant role in reducing the complexities within the sociotechnical domains. This study aims to understand how implementation science strategies are being applied to patient-focused DHIs in LMICs, its impact on adoption and utilisation. Methods A triangulated search was conducted on five electronic databases using a pretested strategy. A heterogeneous range of study types on patient-focused DHIs was included to capture different research methodologies used to describe implementation. The screening was done by two reviewers using inclusion/exclusion criteria registered on PROSPERO. Quality was accessed using the JBI appraisal tool for case studies, the CASP quality assessment tool for systematic reviews and qualitative studies, and the ROBIN-I tool for quasi-experimental studies. Synthesis was by Popay et al's guidance on narrative synthesis. Results Eleven studies from eight countries met the inclusion criteria. Through the lens of the NASSS framework and the ERIC clusters, forty-five implementation science strategies out of seventy-three were identified of which only twenty-seven percent of included studies applied more than fifty percent of the identified strategies. Conclusions The trend revealed that DHIs with higher and strategic application patterns tackled more sociotechnical system complexities and experienced better adoption/ utilisation. For the basics, we identified four heavy weight favorability factors that should be considered when choosing implementation strategies in this context. Large scale randomised interventional studies are however recommended to further measure impact. PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023388786
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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