ABSTRACT
As digital healthcare services are expanding in use and purpose in a Danish context so are the functionalities embedded in these, constituting citizens' access to healthcare services and personal health data. In Denmark, the impact of inequalities in digital healthcare remains largely unexplored, making it crucial to pay close attention to this aspect as the digital transformation of the sector progresses. According to the Danish Health Act (2019), the Danish healthcare system is required to ensure easy and equal access to healthcare, high-quality treatment, coherent patient pathways, freedom of choice, easy access to information, transparency, and short waiting times for every citizen. These are focal law-based requirements influenced by the digitalisation of healthcare. Hence, based on insights from a highly digitalised country, in this case, Denmark, this paper aims to initiate a discussion on inequities in digital healthcare, address current challenges, and consider future directions by elaborating on conceptual, ethical, evidence-informed, and methodological issues linked to inequities in digital healthcare. Specifically, this paper discusses why inequities in digital healthcare in a Danish context need increased attention, how health equity is embedded in Danish legislation and how it can be approached from an ethical perspective. The central focus revolves around the essential principles of empowerment, emancipation, and equity, which are being highlighted to emphasise that the digitalisation of healthcare should actively work towards preventing and avoiding the perpetuation of healthcare inequalities. The paper concludes by discussing future directions for ensuring a more sustainable, robust, and equitable digital healthcare system.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The use of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) to eradicate intestinal carriage of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) has been described in case reports and small case series. Although few in numbers, these patients suffer from recurrent infections that may exacerbate both the patients' comorbidities and their healths. In the current study, we hypothesized that FMT for MDRO-related urinary tract infections (UTIs) reduces hospitalisations and associated costs. METHODS: In a cohort of patients referred for FMT from 2015 to 2020, we selected all patients who had consecutively been referred for eradication of MRDO carriage with UTIs. An early economic assessment was performed to calculate hospital-related costs. The overall study cohort was registered at ClinicalTrials, study identifier NCT03712722. RESULTS: We consecutively included five patients with UTIs caused by MDROs. Four of the patients were renal transplant recipients. Patients were followed for median 126 days (range 60-320), where the follow-up duration for each patient was aligned with the number of days from the first UTI to FMT. The median number of UTIs per patient dropped from 4 to 0. Investigating hospital costs, hospital admission days dropped by 87% and monthly hospital costs by 79%. CONCLUSIONS: FMT was effective in reducing the occurrence of UTIs and mediated a marked reduction in hospital costs. We suggest that this strategy is cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials, study identifier NCT03712722.
