Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study

BackgroundEvidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used wh...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jurkeviciute, Monika, Eriksson, Henrik
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2020-08-01
Series:Journal of Medical Internet Research
Online Access:http://www.jmir.org/2020/8/e17718/
id doaj-6eb1a50bf70a4d78a703555e90597569
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6eb1a50bf70a4d78a703555e905975692021-04-02T19:21:33ZengJMIR PublicationsJournal of Medical Internet Research1438-88712020-08-01228e1771810.2196/17718Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case StudyJurkeviciute, MonikaEriksson, Henrik BackgroundEvidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. MethodsThis study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. ResultsEvidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. ConclusionsInitiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.http://www.jmir.org/2020/8/e17718/
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jurkeviciute, Monika
Eriksson, Henrik
spellingShingle Jurkeviciute, Monika
Eriksson, Henrik
Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
Journal of Medical Internet Research
author_facet Jurkeviciute, Monika
Eriksson, Henrik
author_sort Jurkeviciute, Monika
title Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
title_short Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
title_full Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
title_fullStr Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
title_full_unstemmed Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study
title_sort exploring the use of evidence from the development and evaluation of an electronic health (ehealth) trial: case study
publisher JMIR Publications
series Journal of Medical Internet Research
issn 1438-8871
publishDate 2020-08-01
description BackgroundEvidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. MethodsThis study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. ResultsEvidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. ConclusionsInitiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.
url http://www.jmir.org/2020/8/e17718/
work_keys_str_mv AT jurkeviciutemonika exploringtheuseofevidencefromthedevelopmentandevaluationofanelectronichealthehealthtrialcasestudy
AT erikssonhenrik exploringtheuseofevidencefromthedevelopmentandevaluationofanelectronichealthehealthtrialcasestudy
_version_ 1721548934774521856