Evaluating the implementation of a Personal Health Record for chronic care: A mixed methods approach

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractAcademic

Abstract

Background: Most evaluations of personal health records (PHRs) focus on the effectiveness of PHRs as stand-alone, patient-centered technologies. However, eHealth implementation is a multi-level and complex process that requires a holistic development and evaluation approach with attention for the triad of the technology, its users and the context of implementation. The goal of this research was to gain a more complete understanding of the implementation process of e-Vita, a PHR for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, or COPD.
Methods: Log data provided insight into the actual use of e-Vita on the long term. Focus groups were used to assess how caregivers believe that PHRs add value to their working routines (the intended use). Interviews with caregivers and usability tests with potential end-users of e-Vita provided insight into the implementation process and the differences and similarities between the intended and actual use of e-Vita.
Results: The main problem was identified on the level of the context: e-Vita was offered to end-users without their involvement during earlier phases of development and guidance regarding the integration of the PHR into daily (working) routines was lacking. Therefore, caregivers were ignorant on deploying e-Vita in daily care routines and it was seen as a burden on top of the regular care. In turn, caregivers find it difficult to motivate their patients in using e-Vita. During the focus groups, the coaching service was perceived as the core of a PHR. However, the log data analyses showed that the actual use of e-Vita by
Submission form oral or poster presentation
Supporting Health By Technology VIII
patients is lagging and did not match this intended use. It is likely that the usability of the PHR influenced the actual use as well.
Conclusion: When evaluating the implementation process, a mixed methods approach is of added value in providing explanations for the found effects that could not be revealed by solely focusing on the effectiveness of the technology in an experimental trial.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2018
EventSupporting Health by Technology VIII 2018 - University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
Duration: 1 Jun 20181 Jun 2018
Conference number: 8
http://healthbytech.com/

Conference

ConferenceSupporting Health by Technology VIII 2018
CountryNetherlands
CityEnschede
Period1/06/181/06/18
Internet address

Fingerprint

Personal Health Records
Caregivers
Technology
Focus Groups
Posters
Biomedical Technology
Telemedicine
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Heart Failure
Interviews

Cite this

@conference{22f25ddb21bf4db1bfbf78138e084313,
title = "Evaluating the implementation of a Personal Health Record for chronic care: A mixed methods approach",
abstract = "Background: Most evaluations of personal health records (PHRs) focus on the effectiveness of PHRs as stand-alone, patient-centered technologies. However, eHealth implementation is a multi-level and complex process that requires a holistic development and evaluation approach with attention for the triad of the technology, its users and the context of implementation. The goal of this research was to gain a more complete understanding of the implementation process of e-Vita, a PHR for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, or COPD.Methods: Log data provided insight into the actual use of e-Vita on the long term. Focus groups were used to assess how caregivers believe that PHRs add value to their working routines (the intended use). Interviews with caregivers and usability tests with potential end-users of e-Vita provided insight into the implementation process and the differences and similarities between the intended and actual use of e-Vita.Results: The main problem was identified on the level of the context: e-Vita was offered to end-users without their involvement during earlier phases of development and guidance regarding the integration of the PHR into daily (working) routines was lacking. Therefore, caregivers were ignorant on deploying e-Vita in daily care routines and it was seen as a burden on top of the regular care. In turn, caregivers find it difficult to motivate their patients in using e-Vita. During the focus groups, the coaching service was perceived as the core of a PHR. However, the log data analyses showed that the actual use of e-Vita bySubmission form oral or poster presentationSupporting Health By Technology VIIIpatients is lagging and did not match this intended use. It is likely that the usability of the PHR influenced the actual use as well.Conclusion: When evaluating the implementation process, a mixed methods approach is of added value in providing explanations for the found effects that could not be revealed by solely focusing on the effectiveness of the technology in an experimental trial.",
author = "Floor Sieverink and Kelders, {Saskia Marion} and {van Gemert-Pijnen}, {Julia E.W.C.}",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
day = "1",
language = "English",
note = "Supporting Health by Technology VIII 2018 ; Conference date: 01-06-2018 Through 01-06-2018",
url = "http://healthbytech.com/",

}

Evaluating the implementation of a Personal Health Record for chronic care : A mixed methods approach. / Sieverink, Floor ; Kelders, Saskia Marion; van Gemert-Pijnen, Julia E.W.C.

2018. Abstract from Supporting Health by Technology VIII 2018, Enschede, Netherlands.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractAcademic

TY - CONF

T1 - Evaluating the implementation of a Personal Health Record for chronic care

T2 - A mixed methods approach

AU - Sieverink, Floor

AU - Kelders, Saskia Marion

AU - van Gemert-Pijnen, Julia E.W.C.

PY - 2018/6/1

Y1 - 2018/6/1

N2 - Background: Most evaluations of personal health records (PHRs) focus on the effectiveness of PHRs as stand-alone, patient-centered technologies. However, eHealth implementation is a multi-level and complex process that requires a holistic development and evaluation approach with attention for the triad of the technology, its users and the context of implementation. The goal of this research was to gain a more complete understanding of the implementation process of e-Vita, a PHR for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, or COPD.Methods: Log data provided insight into the actual use of e-Vita on the long term. Focus groups were used to assess how caregivers believe that PHRs add value to their working routines (the intended use). Interviews with caregivers and usability tests with potential end-users of e-Vita provided insight into the implementation process and the differences and similarities between the intended and actual use of e-Vita.Results: The main problem was identified on the level of the context: e-Vita was offered to end-users without their involvement during earlier phases of development and guidance regarding the integration of the PHR into daily (working) routines was lacking. Therefore, caregivers were ignorant on deploying e-Vita in daily care routines and it was seen as a burden on top of the regular care. In turn, caregivers find it difficult to motivate their patients in using e-Vita. During the focus groups, the coaching service was perceived as the core of a PHR. However, the log data analyses showed that the actual use of e-Vita bySubmission form oral or poster presentationSupporting Health By Technology VIIIpatients is lagging and did not match this intended use. It is likely that the usability of the PHR influenced the actual use as well.Conclusion: When evaluating the implementation process, a mixed methods approach is of added value in providing explanations for the found effects that could not be revealed by solely focusing on the effectiveness of the technology in an experimental trial.

AB - Background: Most evaluations of personal health records (PHRs) focus on the effectiveness of PHRs as stand-alone, patient-centered technologies. However, eHealth implementation is a multi-level and complex process that requires a holistic development and evaluation approach with attention for the triad of the technology, its users and the context of implementation. The goal of this research was to gain a more complete understanding of the implementation process of e-Vita, a PHR for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, or COPD.Methods: Log data provided insight into the actual use of e-Vita on the long term. Focus groups were used to assess how caregivers believe that PHRs add value to their working routines (the intended use). Interviews with caregivers and usability tests with potential end-users of e-Vita provided insight into the implementation process and the differences and similarities between the intended and actual use of e-Vita.Results: The main problem was identified on the level of the context: e-Vita was offered to end-users without their involvement during earlier phases of development and guidance regarding the integration of the PHR into daily (working) routines was lacking. Therefore, caregivers were ignorant on deploying e-Vita in daily care routines and it was seen as a burden on top of the regular care. In turn, caregivers find it difficult to motivate their patients in using e-Vita. During the focus groups, the coaching service was perceived as the core of a PHR. However, the log data analyses showed that the actual use of e-Vita bySubmission form oral or poster presentationSupporting Health By Technology VIIIpatients is lagging and did not match this intended use. It is likely that the usability of the PHR influenced the actual use as well.Conclusion: When evaluating the implementation process, a mixed methods approach is of added value in providing explanations for the found effects that could not be revealed by solely focusing on the effectiveness of the technology in an experimental trial.

M3 - Abstract

ER -