↓ Skip to main content

‘Massive potential’ or ‘safety risk’? Health worker views on telehealth in the care of older people and implications for successful normalization

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
‘Massive potential’ or ‘safety risk’? Health worker views on telehealth in the care of older people and implications for successful normalization
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12911-016-0373-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy Shulver, Maggie Killington, Maria Crotty

Abstract

Telehealth technologies, which enable delivery of healthcare services at distance, offer promise for responding to the challenges created by an ageing population. However, successful implementation of telehealth into mainstream healthcare systems has been slow and fraught with failure. Understanding of frontline providers' experiences and attitudes regarding telehealth is a crucial aspect of successful implementation. This study aims to examine healthcare worker views on telehealth, and their implications for implementation to mainstream healthcare services for older people. The study includes a focus on two further dimensions of urban versus rural services and level of clinician experience with telehealth. Seven semi-structured focus groups were conducted with a total of 44 healthcare workers providing services to older people in the areas of rehabilitation and allied health, residential aged care and palliative care. Focus groups included both telehealth experienced and inexperienced groups. Of the experienced groups, two provided services to both urban and rural patients, and two to rural patients. Inexperienced groups included one rural and two urban. Thematic analysis was undertaken to identify predominant themes. Between-group differences and agreement in viewpoints for each of these themes are discussed and mapped to the theoretical constructs of Normalization Process Theory. The views of participants varied with the extent of telehealth experience and perception of accessibility of healthcare services. Four themes describing clinician attitudes and perceptions that could impact on successful implementation of telehealth services are outlined: 1) Workability of telehealth: exponential growth in access or decay in the quality of healthcare? 2) What is an acceptable level of risk to patient safety with telehealth? 3) Shifting responsibilities and recalibrating the team; and 4) Change of architecture required to enable integration of telehealth service delivery. The use of telehealth technologies to provide healthcare services to older people may be more readily normalized in areas where existing services are limited. Though exposure to telehealth may be a factor, changes to the perceived feasibility of telehealth in relation to conventional services, as well as supportive infrastructure and training and skill recalibration may be more critical to successful normalization of telehealth services for older people.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 21%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 7 8%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 27%
Psychology 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 18 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,880,581
of 11,945,047 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#319
of 1,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,354
of 258,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,945,047 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,074 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 258,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.