Access to health care perceived by parents caring for their child at home supported by eHealth-a directed approach introducing aperture

Mia Hylén, Stefan Nilsson, Inger Kristensson-Hallström, Gudrún Kristjánsdóttir, Pernilla Stenström, Rúnar Vilhjálmsson, Mia Hylén, Stefan Nilsson, Inger Kristensson-Hallström, Gudrún Kristjánsdóttir, Pernilla Stenström, Rúnar Vilhjálmsson

Abstract

Background: In recent years a variety of eHealth solutions has been introduced to enhance efficiency and to empower patients, leading to a more accessible and equitable health care system. Within pediatric care eHealth has been advocated to reduce emergency and hospital outpatient visits, with many parents preferring eHealth to physical visits following the transition from hospital to home. Still, not many studies have focused on access from the parental perspective. Therefore, the aim of the study was to analyze access to health care as perceived by parents when caring for their child at home, with conventional care supported by eHealth following pediatric surgery or preterm birth.

Methods: Twenty-five parents who went home with their child following hospitalization and received conventional care supported by eHealth (a tablet) were interviewed in this qualitative study. Directed content analysis was used, guided by a framework for dimensions of access previously described as: approachability, acceptability, affordability, appropriateness, and availability.

Results: All dimensions of access were present in the material with the dimensions of approachability, appropriateness and acceptability most frequently emphasized. The dimensions highlighted a strong acceptance of eHealth, which was perceived by the parents as beneficial, particularly access to communication with health care personnel familiar to them. The chat function of the tablet was often mentioned as positive. A new dimension was also identified: "aperture." It is defined by the pathways by which communication is transmitted in cyberspace, and these pathways are not easily visualized for parents submitting information, therefore generating concerns.

Conclusions: Parents generally experienced good access to the eHealth-supported health care. Describing access through its dimensions complemented previous descriptions of eHealth in pediatric care and gave new insights. As such, the new dimension of "aperture", the indeterminate opening of pathways of communication reflecting the uncertainty of not comprehending cyberspace, could be further evaluated. The dimensional framework of access is recommended when evaluating eHealth in the future.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04150120.

Keywords: Access; Health care; Neonatal; Pediatric care; Surgery; eHealth.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

References

    1. Vilhjalmsson R. Family income and insufficient medical care: A prospective study of alternative explanations. Scand J Public Health. 2021;49(8):875–883. doi: 10.1177/1403494820944096.
    1. Bunker JP. The role of medical care in contributing to health improvements within societies. Int J Epidemiol. 2001;30(6):1260–1263. doi: 10.1093/ije/30.6.1260.
    1. WHO. Digital Health: WHO. 2020. Available online: (Accessed on 3 Feb 2022).
    1. CoPE M. Access to pediatric emergency medical care. Pediatrics. 2000;105(3):647–649. doi: 10.1542/peds.105.3.647.
    1. Badawy SM, Radovic A. Digital Approaches to Remote Pediatric Health Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Existing Evidence and a Call for Further Research. JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2020;3(1):e20049. doi: 10.2196/20049.
    1. World Health Organization. Global Observatory for eHealth. The Fifty-eighth World Health Assembly 2005. Resolution WHA58.28 eHealth. Geneva: WHO; 2005.
    1. Eysenbach G. What is e-health? J Med Internet Res. 2001;3(2):E20. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3.2.e20.
    1. Demi S, Hilmy S, Keller C. Doctor at your fingertips: An exploration of digital visits from stakeholders’ perspectives. Life. 2021;11(1):6. doi: 10.3390/life11010006.
    1. Hurst EJ. Evolutions in telemedicine: from smoke signals to mobile health solutions. J Hosp Librariansh. 2016;16(2):174–185. doi: 10.1080/15323269.2016.1150750.
    1. Mooney GH. Equity in health care: confronting the confusion. Eff Health Care. 1983;1(4):179–185.
    1. Penchansky R, Thomas JW. The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Med Care. 1981;19(2):127–140. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198102000-00001.
    1. Vilhjalmsson R. Failure to seek needed medical care: results from a national health survey of Icelanders. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(6):1320–1330. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.024.
    1. Levesque JF, Harris MF, Russell G. Patient-centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations. Int J Equity Health. 2013;12:18. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-12-18.
    1. Norris C, Al-Muzaffar I. The use of eHealth technologies to support communication with parents in the neonatal unit; an updated literature review for the COVID-19 era. J Neonatal Nurs. 2021;27(3):180–184. doi: 10.1016/j.jnn.2020.12.002.
    1. Strand AS, Johnsson B, Hena M, Magnusson B, Hallstrom IK. Developing eHealth in neonatal care to enhance parents' self-management. Scand J Caring Sci. 2021;00:0–9.
    1. Lindkvist RM, Sjostrom-Strand A, Landgren K, Johnsson BA, Stenstrom P, Hallstrom IK. "In a Way We Took the Hospital Home"-A Descriptive Mixed-Methods Study of Parents' Usage and Experiences of eHealth for Self-Management after Hospital Discharge Due to Pediatric Surgery or Preterm Birth. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(12):e6480.
    1. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687.
    1. Al Ameen M, Liu J, Kwak K. Security and privacy issues in wireless sensor networks for healthcare applications. J Med Syst. 2012;36(1):93–101. doi: 10.1007/s10916-010-9449-4.
    1. Schneble CO, Elger BS, Shaw D. The Cambridge Analytica affair and Internet-mediated research. EMBO Rep. 2018;19(8):e46579.
    1. Kind T, Silber TJ. Ethical issues in pediatric e-health. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2004;43(7):593–599. doi: 10.1177/000992280404300701.
    1. Korhonen ES, Nordman T, Eriksson K. Technology and its ethics in nursing and caring journals: An integrative literature review. Nurs Ethics. 2015;22(5):561–576. doi: 10.1177/0969733014549881.
    1. Coyne I, Hallstrom I, Soderback M. Reframing the focus from a family-centred to a child-centred care approach for children's healthcare. J Child Health Care. 2016;20(4):494–502. doi: 10.1177/1367493516642744.
    1. Prensky M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon. 2001;9(5):1–6. doi: 10.1108/10748120110424816.
    1. Haluza D, Naszay M, Stockinger A, Jungwirth D. Digital Natives Versus Digital Immigrants: Influence of Online Health Information Seeking on the Doctor-Patient Relationship. Health Commun. 2017;32(11):1342–1349. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2016.1220044.
    1. Garattini L, Badinella Martini M, Zanetti M. More room for telemedicine after COVID-19: lessons for primary care? Eur J Health Econ. 2021;22(2):183–186. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01248-y.
    1. Nilsson C, Skar L, Soderberg S. Swedish district nurses' attitudes to implement information and communication technology in home nursing. Open Nurs J. 2008;2:68–72. doi: 10.2174/1874434600802010068.
    1. Skar L, Soderberg S. The importance of ethical aspects when implementing eHealth services in healthcare: A discussion paper. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74(5):1043–1050. doi: 10.1111/jan.13493.
    1. van Velsen L, Evers M, Bara CD. Op den Akker H, Boerema S, Hermens H: Understanding the Acceptance of an eHealth Technology in the Early Stages of Development: An End-User Walkthrough Approach and Two Case Studies. JMIR Form Res. 2018;2(1):e10474. doi: 10.2196/10474.
    1. Breivold K, Hjaelmhult E, Sjostrom-Strand A, Hallstrom IK. Mothers' experiences after coming home from the hospital with a moderately to late preterm infant - a qualitative study. Scand J Caring Sci. 2019;33(3):632–640. doi: 10.1111/scs.12656.
    1. de Flon M, Glaffey G, Jarl L, Sellbrant K, Nilsson S. The Childhood Cancer Centre Is Coming Home: Experiences of Hospital-Based Home Care. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(12):e6241.
    1. Roberts A, Philip L, Currie M, Mort A. Striking a balance between in-person care and the use of eHealth to support the older rural population with chronic pain. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2015;10:27536. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v10.27536.
    1. Jiang X, Ming WK, You JH. The Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Health Interventions on the Management of Cardiovascular Diseases: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(6):e13166. doi: 10.2196/13166.
    1. Lee JY, Lee SWH. Telemedicine Cost-Effectiveness for Diabetes Management: A Systematic Review. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20(7):492–500. doi: 10.1089/dia.2018.0098.
    1. Cho JY, Lee E. Reducing Confusion about Grounded Theory and Qualitative Content Analysis: Similarities and Differences. Qual Report. 2014;19(32):1–20.
    1. Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014;41(5):545–547. doi: 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547.
    1. Cypress BS. Rigor or Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research: Perspectives, Strategies, Reconceptualization, and Recommendations. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2017;36(4):253–63. doi: 10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅