Development of an evidence-based e-health readiness assessment framework for Uganda.

Vincent M Kiberu, Maurice Mars, Richard E Scott
{"title":"Development of an evidence-based e-health readiness assessment framework for Uganda.","authors":"Vincent M Kiberu,&nbsp;Maurice Mars,&nbsp;Richard E Scott","doi":"10.1177/1833358319839253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While e-health readiness assessment is vital to the successful implementation of e-health innovations, there is little published guidance (i.e. e-health readiness assessment frameworks (eHRAFs)) for institutions and countries.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop an evidence-based and locally relevant eHRAF for Uganda.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A list of possible e-health readiness domains and constructs was developed through a structured review of the e-health literature. This list was first refined using author experience, insight and reflection. Based on this refined list, an eHRAF questionnaire was developed, which was initially pilot tested for face and content validity. Thereafter, it was distributed to 13 purposively selected study participants who were Ugandan e-health experts from the fields of health, information and communications technology (ICT) and academia. The questionnaire was discussed in a focus group setting for consensus input, where study participants confirmed, rejected or revised proposed domains and constructs suitable to guide e-health readiness assessment at either the national or site-specific level within Uganda.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 148 identified literature resources, 13 met inclusion criteria. A subjective review highlighted 11 frequently used e-health domains. Further reflection reduced these to nine domains, which were shared with study participants by means of the questionnaire. Based upon prior use of, and familiarity with, a management tool (PESTEL), participants' consensus on factors essential for readiness assessment in Uganda was aligned with PESTEL's six domains: political, economic, sociocultural, technological, environmental, and legal and regulatory. The participants considered engagement, and core and societal readiness as optional domains. Based on this input, the authors developed a proposed eHRAF suitable for Uganda, comprised of domains, sub-domains and constructs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The eHRAF developed in this research is an evidence-based framework (literature and cross-sectoral expert opinion) and consists of primary domains, sub-domains and constructs suitable for assessing e-health readiness in Uganda, either nationally or locally, prior to implementation of any e-health system. The process and principles may have utility in other countries.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>A national, culturally relevant, context-specific Ugandan eHRAF could facilitate efficient and effective planning and implementation of new e-health programmes across the country and assist policymakers and legislators to develop consistent and reliable guidelines and regulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73210,"journal":{"name":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1833358319839253","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1833358319839253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/4/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: While e-health readiness assessment is vital to the successful implementation of e-health innovations, there is little published guidance (i.e. e-health readiness assessment frameworks (eHRAFs)) for institutions and countries.

Objective: To develop an evidence-based and locally relevant eHRAF for Uganda.

Method: A list of possible e-health readiness domains and constructs was developed through a structured review of the e-health literature. This list was first refined using author experience, insight and reflection. Based on this refined list, an eHRAF questionnaire was developed, which was initially pilot tested for face and content validity. Thereafter, it was distributed to 13 purposively selected study participants who were Ugandan e-health experts from the fields of health, information and communications technology (ICT) and academia. The questionnaire was discussed in a focus group setting for consensus input, where study participants confirmed, rejected or revised proposed domains and constructs suitable to guide e-health readiness assessment at either the national or site-specific level within Uganda.

Results: Of 148 identified literature resources, 13 met inclusion criteria. A subjective review highlighted 11 frequently used e-health domains. Further reflection reduced these to nine domains, which were shared with study participants by means of the questionnaire. Based upon prior use of, and familiarity with, a management tool (PESTEL), participants' consensus on factors essential for readiness assessment in Uganda was aligned with PESTEL's six domains: political, economic, sociocultural, technological, environmental, and legal and regulatory. The participants considered engagement, and core and societal readiness as optional domains. Based on this input, the authors developed a proposed eHRAF suitable for Uganda, comprised of domains, sub-domains and constructs.

Conclusion: The eHRAF developed in this research is an evidence-based framework (literature and cross-sectoral expert opinion) and consists of primary domains, sub-domains and constructs suitable for assessing e-health readiness in Uganda, either nationally or locally, prior to implementation of any e-health system. The process and principles may have utility in other countries.

Implications: A national, culturally relevant, context-specific Ugandan eHRAF could facilitate efficient and effective planning and implementation of new e-health programmes across the country and assist policymakers and legislators to develop consistent and reliable guidelines and regulations.

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
为乌干达制定基于证据的电子卫生准备评估框架。
背景:虽然电子卫生准备评估对成功实施电子卫生创新至关重要,但针对机构和国家的已出版指南(即电子卫生准备评估框架)却很少。目标:为乌干达开发一个基于证据和与当地相关的eHRAF。方法:通过对电子卫生文献的结构化回顾,制定了可能的电子卫生准备领域和结构列表。这份名单首先是根据作者的经验、洞察力和反思来完善的。在此基础上,开发了eHRAF问卷,并对其进行了初步的人脸效度和内容效度测试。此后,它被分发给13名有目的地选择的研究参与者,他们是来自卫生、信息和通信技术(信通技术)和学术界的乌干达电子保健专家。在焦点小组环境中讨论了调查表,以便达成共识,研究参与者确认、拒绝或修订了建议的领域和结构,这些领域和结构适合指导乌干达国内国家或特定地点的电子卫生准备情况评估。结果:148篇文献资源中,13篇符合纳入标准。一项主观审查突出了11个经常使用的电子卫生领域。进一步的反思将这些减少到九个领域,这些领域通过问卷调查与研究参与者共享。基于先前对管理工具(PESTEL)的使用和熟悉程度,参与者对乌干达准备情况评估必不可少的因素的共识与PESTEL的六个领域保持一致:政治、经济、社会文化、技术、环境以及法律和监管。参与者认为参与、核心和社会准备是可选的领域。基于这一输入,作者开发了一个适合乌干达的拟议eHRAF,由域、子域和结构组成。结论:本研究中开发的eHRAF是一个基于证据的框架(文献和跨部门专家意见),由主要领域、子领域和结构组成,适用于在实施任何电子卫生系统之前评估乌干达全国或地方的电子卫生准备情况。这一过程和原则在其他国家也可能有用。影响:一项全国性的、与文化相关的、针对具体情况的乌干达电子健康评估方案可促进在全国范围内高效和有效地规划和实施新的电子卫生方案,并协助决策者和立法者制定一致和可靠的准则和法规。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Medical and nursing clinician perspectives on the usability of the hospital electronic medical record: A qualitative analysis. The importance of SNOMED CT concept specificity in healthcare analytics. Patient online access to general practice medical records: A qualitative study on patients' needs and expectations. For-profit versus non-profit cybersecurity posture: breach types and locations in healthcare organisations. Impact of clinical note format on diagnostic accuracy and efficiency.
×
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