Fighting the Same Battles on a New Battleground: Embedding Technologies in a Virtual Care Environment.

The pandemic necessitated the rapid design, development and implementation of technologies to allow remote monitoring of COVID-19 patients at home. This study aimed to explore the environmental barriers and facilitators to the successful development and implementation of virtual care technologies in this fast-paced context. We interviewed eight staff at a virtual hospital in Australia. We found key facilitators to be a learning organizational culture and strong leadership support. Barriers included interoperability issues, legislative constraints and unrealistic clinician expectations. Also, we found that a combination of hot-desking and the lack of single sign on in the virtual care environment, was reported to create additional work for staff. Overall, despite this unique context, our findings are consistent with prior work examining design and implementation of healthcare technologies. The fast pace and high-pressure environment appeared to magnify previously reported barriers, but also cultivate and foster a learning culture.

How digital health translational research is prioritised: a qualitative stakeholder-driven approach to decision support evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Digital health is now routinely being applied in clinical care, and with a variety of clinician-facing systems available, healthcare organisations are increasingly required to make decisions about technology implementation and evaluation. However, few studies have examined how digital health research is prioritised, particularly research focused on clinician-facing decision support systems. This study aimed to identify criteria for prioritising digital health research, examine how these differ from criteria for prioritising traditional health research and determine priority decision support use cases for a collaborative implementation research programme. METHODS: Drawing on an interpretive listening model for priority setting and a stakeholder-driven approach, our prioritisation process involved stakeholder identification, eliciting decision support use case priorities from stakeholders, generating initial use case priorities and finalising preferred use cases based on consultations. In this qualitative study, online focus group session(s) were held with stakeholders, audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Fifteen participants attended the online priority setting sessions. Criteria for prioritising digital health research fell into three themes, namely: public health benefit, health system-level factors and research process and feasibility. We identified criteria unique to digital health research as the availability of suitable governance frameworks, candidate technology's alignment with other technologies in use,and the possibility of data-driven insights from health technology data. The final selected use cases were remote monitoring of patients with pulmonary conditions, sepsis detection and automated breast screening. CONCLUSION: The criteria for determining digital health research priority areas are more nuanced than that of traditional health condition focused research and can neither be viewed solely through a clinical lens nor technological lens. As digital health research relies heavily on health technology implementation, digital health prioritisation criteria comprised enablers of successful technology implementation. Our prioritisation process could be applied to other settings and collaborative projects where research institutions partner with healthcare delivery organisations.

Virtual Health Care for Community Management of Patients With COVID-19 in Australia: Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Australia has successfully controlled the COVID-19 pandemic. Similar to other high-income countries, Australia has extensively used telehealth services. Virtual health care, including telemedicine in combination with remote patient monitoring, has been implemented in certain settings as part of new models of care that are aimed at managing patients with COVID-19 outside the hospital setting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the implementation of and early experience with virtual health care for community management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This observational cohort study was conducted with patients with COVID-19 who availed of a large Australian metropolitan health service with an established virtual health care program capable of monitoring patients remotely. We included patients with COVID-19 who received the health service, could self-isolate safely, did not require immediate admission to an in-patient setting, had no major active comorbid illness, and could be managed at home or at other suitable sites. Skin temperature, pulse rate, and blood oxygen saturation were remotely monitored. The primary outcome measures were care escalation rates, including emergency department presentation, and hospital admission. RESULTS: During March 11-29, 2020, a total of 162 of 173 (93.6%) patients with COVID-19 (median age 38 years, range 11-79 years), who were diagnosed locally, were enrolled in the virtual health care program. For 62 of 162 (38.3%) patients discharged during this period, the median length of stay was 8 (range 1-17) days. The peak of 100 prevalent patients equated to approximately 25 patients per registered nurse per shift. Patients were contacted a median of 16 (range 1-30) times during this period. Video consultations (n=1902, 66.3%) comprised most of the patient contacts, and 132 (81.5%) patients were monitored remotely. Care escalation rates were low, with an ambulance attendance rate of 3% (n=5), emergency department attendance rate of 2.5% (n=4), and hospital admission rate of 1.9% (n=3). No deaths were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based virtual health care is safe for managing most patients with COVID-19 and can be rapidly implemented in an urban Australian setting for pandemic management. Health services implementing virtual health care should anticipate challenges associated with rapid technology deployments and provide adequate support to resolve them, including strategies to support the use of health information technologies among consumers.

A maturity model to deliver a national shared medications system, options, practice, and pitfalls.

In July 2012 Australia launched the Personally Controlled electronic Health Record (PCEHR). This structured record allows health related information to be shared between providers as well as between providers and consumers. The next big challenge in delivering value for consumers is to use the medicines information distributed throughout the record in a way that allows better medications management at all levels. This poster points to the design and usability challenges being dealt with in that process during a national roll out and proposes a maturity model to accelerate the delivery of shared medication records. It is suggested that this model will have relevance in other jurisdictions.