Ethical assessment of virtual consultation services: application of a practical ethical checklist to direct-to-consumer services in Aotearoa New Zealand.

IF 1.1 Q4 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Journal of primary health care Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1071/HC24030
Madeleine Reid, Tania Moerenhout
{"title":"Ethical assessment of virtual consultation services: application of a practical ethical checklist to direct-to-consumer services in Aotearoa New Zealand.","authors":"Madeleine Reid, Tania Moerenhout","doi":"10.1071/HC24030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Introduction Evaluating digital health services from an ethical perspective remains one of the more difficult challenges in telemedicine and health technology assessment. We have previously developed a practical ethical checklist comprising 25 questions covering six ethical themes: privacy, security, and confidentiality; equity; autonomy and informed consent; quality and standards of care; patient empowerment; and continuity of care. The checklist makes ethical analysis more easily accessible to a broader audience, including health care providers, technology developers, and patients. Aim This project applies the previously developed practical ethical checklist to direct-to-consumer virtual primary care consultation services in Aotearoa New Zealand to conduct an ethical assessment. Method We first mapped the available services. The ethical framework was then applied to assess these services based on publicly available information. Results Our findings show that the examined virtual consultation services adequately address ethical considerations, particularly regarding patient data privacy and informed consent. We identified areas for improvement in equity, patient empowerment, and continuity of care. Discussion The application of this framework raises fundamental questions on how continuity of care, equity, and comprehensive care can be protected when virtual care becomes more ubiquitous. The checklist can help virtual consultation services identify areas of improvement and ensure they meet ethical criteria, thus contributing to quality of care. The framework may be adapted to other digital health services and tools, providing ethical guidance to technology developers, clinicians, and patients and their whānau (family).</p>","PeriodicalId":16855,"journal":{"name":"Journal of primary health care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of primary health care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/HC24030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Evaluating digital health services from an ethical perspective remains one of the more difficult challenges in telemedicine and health technology assessment. We have previously developed a practical ethical checklist comprising 25 questions covering six ethical themes: privacy, security, and confidentiality; equity; autonomy and informed consent; quality and standards of care; patient empowerment; and continuity of care. The checklist makes ethical analysis more easily accessible to a broader audience, including health care providers, technology developers, and patients. Aim This project applies the previously developed practical ethical checklist to direct-to-consumer virtual primary care consultation services in Aotearoa New Zealand to conduct an ethical assessment. Method We first mapped the available services. The ethical framework was then applied to assess these services based on publicly available information. Results Our findings show that the examined virtual consultation services adequately address ethical considerations, particularly regarding patient data privacy and informed consent. We identified areas for improvement in equity, patient empowerment, and continuity of care. Discussion The application of this framework raises fundamental questions on how continuity of care, equity, and comprehensive care can be protected when virtual care becomes more ubiquitous. The checklist can help virtual consultation services identify areas of improvement and ensure they meet ethical criteria, thus contributing to quality of care. The framework may be adapted to other digital health services and tools, providing ethical guidance to technology developers, clinicians, and patients and their whānau (family).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
虚拟咨询服务的伦理评估:新西兰奥特亚罗瓦地区直接面向消费者服务的实用伦理清单应用。
引言 从伦理角度评估数字医疗服务仍然是远程医疗和医疗技术评估中较为困难的挑战之一。我们之前开发了一份实用的伦理清单,包含 25 个问题,涵盖六个伦理主题:隐私、安全和保密;公平;自主权和知情同意;护理质量和标准;患者授权;以及护理的连续性。该清单使包括医疗服务提供者、技术开发人员和患者在内的更多受众更容易获得伦理分析。目的 本项目将之前开发的实用伦理核对表应用于新西兰奥特亚罗瓦地区直接面向消费者的虚拟初级医疗咨询服务,以进行伦理评估。方法 我们首先绘制了可用服务的地图。然后,根据公开信息,运用伦理框架对这些服务进行评估。结果 我们的研究结果表明,所考察的虚拟咨询服务充分考虑了伦理因素,尤其是在患者数据隐私和知情同意方面。我们发现了在公平性、患者授权和护理连续性方面需要改进的地方。讨论 该框架的应用提出了一些基本问题,即当虚拟医疗变得越来越普遍时,如何保护医疗服务的连续性、公平性和全面性。检查表可以帮助虚拟咨询服务确定需要改进的地方,确保其符合道德标准,从而提高医疗质量。该框架可适用于其他数字医疗服务和工具,为技术开发人员、临床医生、患者及其家人提供伦理指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of primary health care
Journal of primary health care PRIMARY HEALTH CARE-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
79
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊最新文献
A supported primary health pathway for mild traumatic brain injury quality improvement report. Can SSRI's help women suffering with PMS? Checklists for assessing ethical aspects of health technologies and services. Comfort with having sexual orientation recorded on official databases among a community and online sample of gay and bisexual men in Aotearoa New Zealand. Ethical assessment of virtual consultation services: application of a practical ethical checklist to direct-to-consumer services in Aotearoa New Zealand.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1