Meyke Roosink, Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen, Ruud Verdaasdonk, Saskia M Kelders
{"title":"Assessing health technology implementation during academic research and early-stage development: support tools for awareness and guidance: a review.","authors":"Meyke Roosink, Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen, Ruud Verdaasdonk, Saskia M Kelders","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1386998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For successful health technology innovation and implementation it is key to, in an early phase, understand the problem and whether a proposed innovation is the best way to solve the problem. This review performed an initial exploration of published tools that support innovators in academic research and early stage development with awareness and guidance along the end-to-end process of development, evaluation and implementation of health technology innovations. Tools were identified from scientific literature as well as in grey literature by non-systematic searches in public research databases and search engines, and based on expert referral. A total number of 14 tools were included. Tools were classified as either readiness level tool (<i>n</i> = 6), questionnaire/checklist tool (<i>n</i> = 5) or guidance tool (<i>n</i> = 3). A qualitative analysis of the tools identified 5 key domains, 5 innovation phases and 3 implementation principles. All tools were mapped for (partially) addressing the identified domains, phases, and principles. The present review provides awareness of available tools and of important aspects of health technology innovation and implementation (vs. non-technological or non-health related technological innovations). Considerations for tool selection include for example the purpose of use (awareness or guidance) and the type of health technology innovation. Considerations for novel tool development include the specific challenges in academic and early stage development settings, the translation of implementation to early innovation phases, and the importance of multi-disciplinary strategic decision-making. A remaining attention point for future studies is the validation and effectiveness of (self-assessment) tools, especially in the context of support preferences and available support alternatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513387/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1386998","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
For successful health technology innovation and implementation it is key to, in an early phase, understand the problem and whether a proposed innovation is the best way to solve the problem. This review performed an initial exploration of published tools that support innovators in academic research and early stage development with awareness and guidance along the end-to-end process of development, evaluation and implementation of health technology innovations. Tools were identified from scientific literature as well as in grey literature by non-systematic searches in public research databases and search engines, and based on expert referral. A total number of 14 tools were included. Tools were classified as either readiness level tool (n = 6), questionnaire/checklist tool (n = 5) or guidance tool (n = 3). A qualitative analysis of the tools identified 5 key domains, 5 innovation phases and 3 implementation principles. All tools were mapped for (partially) addressing the identified domains, phases, and principles. The present review provides awareness of available tools and of important aspects of health technology innovation and implementation (vs. non-technological or non-health related technological innovations). Considerations for tool selection include for example the purpose of use (awareness or guidance) and the type of health technology innovation. Considerations for novel tool development include the specific challenges in academic and early stage development settings, the translation of implementation to early innovation phases, and the importance of multi-disciplinary strategic decision-making. A remaining attention point for future studies is the validation and effectiveness of (self-assessment) tools, especially in the context of support preferences and available support alternatives.