Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review.
Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review.
复制标题
在COVID-19大流行期间使用远程医疗：Scoping Review。
DOI：
10.2196/24087
复制
发表时间：
2020-12-01
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Cheema S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Doraiswamy S;Abraham A;Mamtani R;Cheema S
2019冠状病毒病大流行造成了前所未有的社会和经济动荡，全球已有3780多万例病例和100多万人死亡。旨在减轻COVID-19对人类健康影响的卫生保健部门创新解决方案带来了积极转变。例如，在这一突发公共卫生事件中，远程保健的使用一直在增加。鉴于这次大流行的规模空前，没有明确的终点，我们的目标是在当前大流行的特定时期（即2020年1月至6月）对现有的远程健康相关文献进行范围研究。我们的范围审查是由乔安娜布里格斯研究所审稿人手册指导的。我们系统地检索了PubMed和Embase数据库，并给出了特定的资格标准。从入围文章中提取的数据包括第一作者和所属单位、期刊名称、出版物类型、用于描述远程保健及其随附定义的术语、应用远程保健的卫生学科或医学专业和亚专业、使用远程保健的目的以及作者对使用远程保健的总体看法。我们整理了现有的资料，并用描述性统计对综合数据进行分析。总共有543篇发表在331种不同期刊上的文章被纳入了这次范围综述。《医学互联网研究杂志》及其姊妹期刊的文章数量最多（25/543,4.6%）。几乎所有（533/543,98.2%）的文章均为英文。大多数文章是观点、评论和观点（333/543,61.3%）。纳入文献的作者大多来自高收入国家（470/543,86.6%），尤其是来自美国（237/543,43.6%）。总共使用了39种不同的定义来描述等同于远程保健的术语。一小部分（42/543,7.7%）的文章侧重于提供与covid -19相关的护理。此外，49.7%（270/543）的文章主要集中在提供临床护理的多个组成部分，23%（125/543）的文章集中在内科的各个专科和亚专科。对于绝大多数（461/543,84.9%）的文章，作者表达了对远程医疗使用的庆祝情绪。本次审查发现，在2019冠状病毒病大流行的前六个月，出现了大量关于远程医疗的新文献，尽管这些文献大多来自高收入国家。有令人信服的证据表明，远程保健可能对未来推进保健工作产生重大影响。然而，必须确定远程保健在资源有限的环境和低收入和中等收入国家的可行性和应用，以利用其潜力并改变世界人口的卫生保健。鉴于远程医疗正在迅速发展，迫切需要在定义、边界、协议、监测、评估和数据隐私方面达成全球共识。
With over 37.8 million cases and over 1 million deaths worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has created a societal and economic upheaval of unparalleled magnitude. A positive transformation has been brought about by innovative solutions in the health care sector that aim to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on human health. For instance, the use of telehealth has been on the rise amidst this public health emergency. Given the unprecedented scale of the pandemic with no definitive endpoint, we aimed to scope the existing telehealth-related literature during a defined period of the ongoing pandemic (ie, January to June 2020). Our scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer Manual. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase databases with specific eligibility criteria. Data extracted from the shortlisted articles included first author and affiliation, journal title, publication type, terminologies used to describe telehealth and their accompanying definitions, health discipline or medical specialties and subspecialties wherein telehealth had been applied, the purpose of telehealth use, and the authors’ overall sentiment on telehealth use. We collated the available information and used descriptive statistics to analyze the synthesized data. In all, 543 articles published across 331 different journals were included in this scoping review. The Journal of Medical Internet Research and its sister journals featured the highest number of articles (25/543, 4.6%). Nearly all (533/543, 98.2%) articles were in English. The majority of the articles were opinions, commentaries, and perspectives (333/543, 61.3%). Most authors of the articles reviewed were from high-income countries (470/543, 86.6%), especially from the United States of America (237/543, 43.6%). In all, 39 different definitions were used to describe terms equivalent to telehealth. A small percentage (42/543, 7.7%) of the articles focused on the provision of COVID-19–related care. Moreover, 49.7% (270/543) of the articles primarily focused on the provision of multiple components of clinical care, and 23% (125/543) of the articles focused on various specialties and subspecialties of internal medicine. For a vast majority (461/543, 84.9%) of the articles, the authors expressed a celebratory sentiment about the use of telehealth. This review identified considerable emerging literature on telehealth during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, albeit mostly from high-income countries. There is compelling evidence to suggest that telehealth may have a significant effect on advancing health care in the future. However, the feasibility and application of telehealth in resource-limited settings and low- and middle-income countries must be established to avail its potential and transform health care for the world’s population. Given the rapidity with which telehealth is advancing, a global consensus on definitions, boundaries, protocols, monitoring, evaluation, and data privacy is urgently needed.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Fatehi, Farhad;Wootton, Richard
通讯作者：
Wootton, Richard
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Cason, Jana;Brannon, Janice A.
通讯作者：
Brannon, Janice A.
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Kanneganti, Abhiram;Sia, Ching-Hui;Ashokka, Balakrishnan;Ooi, Shirley Beng Suat
通讯作者：
Ooi, Shirley Beng Suat
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
McLean, Susannah;Sheikh, Aziz;Pagliari, Claudia
通讯作者：
Pagliari, Claudia
影响因子：
9.7
作者：
Ellimoottil, Chad;An, Lawrence;Hollander, Judd E.
通讯作者：
Hollander, Judd E.