To consolidate existing evidence on experiences and perspectives of healthcare providers involved in telemedicine services in long-term residential care.
Methods
A scoping review was conducted. A systematic search for articles published in 2000–2021 was performed in CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus; further, relevant journals and grey literature websites were hand searched. Key search terms included ‘telemedicine’, ‘telehealth’ and ‘nursing homes’.
Results
Twenty-six articles were included. A narrative synthesis of evidence was conducted. The review identified four themes: (1) Presence of multidisciplinary care, (2) perceived usefulness of telemedicine, (3) perceived ease of use and (4) expanded role of nursing home staff. The presence of multidisciplinary care providers provided a wide range of telemedicine services to residents and promoted interprofessional collaboration between acute and long-term care. Telemedicine was perceived to increase timely onsite management by remote specialists, which enabled care quality improvement. However, technical problems associated with equipment usage reduced the ease of use of telemedicine. Concerns emerged from the expanded role of nursing home staff, which could negatively affect clinical decision-making and create medico-legal risks.
Conclusion and implications
Telemedicine is valuable in distance-based care, especially in the current 2019 coronavirus pandemic, for supporting continuity of care to nursing home residents. This review provided evidence from multiple healthcare providers’ perspectives. Further research can elucidate their specific roles and responsibilities in telemedicine and challenges in work processes, which will facilitate developing evidence-based competencies and improving technical infrastructure, thus contributing to personal and organisational readiness for telemedicine integration.
GillespieSMMoserALGokulaM, et al.Standards for the use of telemedicine for evaluation and management of resident change of condition in the nursing home. J Am Med Dir Assoc2019; 20: 115–122.
2.
LaurenzaEQuintanoMSchiavoneF, et al.The effect of digital technologies adoption in healthcare industry: a case based analysis. Bus Process Manag J2018; 24: 1124–1144.
3.
GrabowskiDCO’MalleyAJ. Use of telemedicine can reduce hospitalizations of nursing home residents and generate savings for medicare. Health Aff2014; 33: 244–250.
4.
LowJAHui JinTTanL, et al.Cost analysis of implementing a telegeriatrics ecosystem with nursing homes: panel data analysis. Health Syst2020; 9: 285–292.
5.
ChessDWhitmanJJCrollD, et al.Impact of after-hours telemedicine on hospitalizations in a skilled nursing facility. Am J Manag Care2018; 24: 385–388.
6.
VestJRJungH-YWileyKJr, et al.Adoption of health information technology among US nursing facilities. J Am Med Dir Assoc2019; 20: 995–1000. e1004.
7.
DriessenJCastleNGHandlerSM. Perceived benefits, barriers, and drivers of telemedicine from the perspective of skilled nursing facility administrative staff stakeholders. J Appl Gerontol2018; 37: 110–120.
8.
KruseCSMileskiMAlaytsevV, et al.Adoption factors associated with electronic health record among long-term care facilities: a systematic review. BMJ open2015; 5: e006615.
9.
GillespieSMHandlerSMBardakhA. Innovation through regulation: COVID-19 and the evolving utility of telemedicine. J Am Med Dir Assoc2020; 21: 1007–1009.
10.
GandhiAYuHGrabowskiDC. High nursing staff turnover In nursing homes offers important quality information: study examines high turnover of nursing staff at US nursing homes. Health Aff2021; 40: 384–391.
11.
AbbasiJ. “Abandoned” nursing homes continue to face critical supply and staff shortages as COVID-19 toll has mounted. Jama2020; 324: 123–125.
12.
XuHIntratorOBowblisJR. Shortages of staff in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: what are the driving factors?J Am Med Dir Assoc2020; 21: 1371–1377.
13.
HarrisDAArchbald-PannoneLKaurJ, et al.Rapid telehealth-centered response to COVID-19 outbreaks in postacute and long-term care facilities. Telemed e-Health2021; 27: 102–106.
14.
NouvenneATicinesiAPariseA, et al.Point-of-care chest ultrasonography as a diagnostic resource for COVID-19 outbreak in nursing homes. J Am Med Dir Assoc2020; 21: 919–923.
15.
CaticAGMattisonMLBakaevI, et al.ECHO-AGE: an innovative model of geriatric care for long-term care residents with dementia and behavioral issues. J Am Med Dir Assoc2014; 15: 938–942.
16.
NewbouldLMountainGHawleyMS, et al.Videoconferencing for health care provision for older adults in care homes: a review of the research evidence. Int J Telemed Appl2017; 2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/5785613
17.
EdirippuligeSMartin-KhanMBeattieE, et al.A systematic review of telemedicine services for residents in long term care facilities. J Telemed Telecare2013; 19: 127–132.
18.
GroomLLMcCarthyMMStimpfelAW, et al.Telemedicine and telehealth in nursing homes: an integrative review. J Am Med Dir Assoc2021; 22: 1784–1801.
19.
DriessenJChangWPatelP, et al.Nursing home provider perceptions of telemedicine for providing specialty consults. Telemed e-Health2018; 24: 510–516.
20.
DriessenJBonhommeAChangW, et al.Nursing home provider perceptions of telemedicine for reducing potentially avoidable hospitalizations. J Am Med Dir Assoc2016; 17: 519–524.
21.
CormiCChruscielJLaplancheD, et al.Telemedicine in nursing homes during the COVID-19 outbreak: a star is born (again). Geriatr Gerontol Int2020; 20: 646–647.
22.
SeifertABatsisJASmithAC. Telemedicine in long-term care facilities during and beyond COVID-19: challenges caused by the digital divide. Front Public Health2020; 8: 690.
23.
WhittenPSypherBD. Evolution of telemedicine from an applied communication perspective in the United States. Telemed J e-Health2006; 12: 590–600.
24.
ArkseyHO’MalleyL. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol2005; 8: 19–32.
25.
VenkateshVThongJYXuX. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: a synthesis and the road ahead. J Assoc Inf Syst2016; 17: 328–376.
26.
VenkateshVMorrisMGDavisGB, et al.User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS QUser acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view.2003; 27: 425–478.
27.
PetersMGodfreyCMcInerneyP, et al. The Joanna Briggs institute reviewers’ manual 2015: methodology for JBI scoping reviews. 2015. DOI: 10.46658/JBIMES-20-12
28.
HongQNFàbreguesSBartlettG, et al.The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf2018; 34: 285–291.
29.
ArmerJMHarrisKDusoldJM. Application of the concerns-based adoption model to the installation of telemedicine in a rural Missouri nursing home. J Nurses Prof Dev2004; 20: 42–49.
30.
BereznickiLRJacksonSLKromdijkW, et al.Improving the management of warfarin in aged-care facilities utilising innovative technology: a proof-of-concept study. Int J Pharm Pract2014; 22: 84–91.
31.
PottsVEarwickerT. Telehealth: monitoring residents in care homes. Pract Nurs2011; 22: 602–606.
32.
LaflammeMRWilcoxDCSullivanJ, et al.A pilot study of usefulness of clinician–patient videoconferencing for making routine medical decisions in the nursing home. J Am Geriatr Soc2005; 53: 1380–1385.
33.
BidmeadEReidTMarshallA, et al.“Teleswallowing”: a case study of remote swallowing assessment. Clin Gov2015; 20: 155–168.
34.
BratanTClarkeMJonesR, et al.Evaluation of the practical feasibility and acceptability of home monitoring in residential homes. J Telemed Telecare2005; 11: 29–31.
35.
NewbouldLMountainGArissS, et al.Remote health care provision in care homes in England: an exploratory mixed methods study of Yorkshire and the Humber. Technologies2019; 7: 24.
36.
GuilfoyleCWoottonRHassallS, et al.User satisfaction with allied health services delivered to residential facilities via videoconferencing. SAGE publications Sage UK: London. England2003; 9: 52–54.
37.
HanjaniLSPeelNMFreemanCR, et al.Using telehealth to enable collaboration of pharmacists and geriatricians in residential medication management reviews. Int J Clin Pharm2019; 41: 1256–1261.
38.
LohP-KFlickerLHornerB. Attitudes toward information and communication technology (ICT) in residential aged care in Western Australia. J Am Med Dir Assoc2009; 10: 408–413.
39.
WadeVWhittakerFHamlynJ. An evaluation of the benefits and challenges of video consulting between general practitioners and residential aged care facilities. J Telemed Telecare2015; 21: 490–493.
40.
SävenstedtSBuchtGNorbergL, et al.Nurse–doctor interaction in teleconsultations between a hospital and a geriatric nursing home. J Telemed Telecare2002; 8: 11–18.
41.
SävenstedtSZingmarkKSandmanP-O. Being present in a distant room: aspects of teleconsultations with older people in a nursing home. Qual Health Res2004; 14: 1046–1057.
42.
Helmer-SmithMFungCAfkhamA, et al.The feasibility of using electronic consultation in long-term care homes. J Am Med Dir Assoc2020; 21: 1166–1170. e1162.
43.
OhligsMStocklassaSRossaintR, et al.Employment of telemedicine in nursing homes: clinical requirement analysis, system development and first test results. Clin Interv Aging2020; 15: 1427.
44.
PiauAVautierCDe MauleonA, et al.Health workers perception on telemedicine in management of neuropsychiatric symptoms in long-term care facilities: two years follow-up. Geriatr Nurs2020; 41: 1000–1005.
45.
SallesNLafargueACressotV, et al.Global geriatric evaluation is feasible during interactive telemedicine in nursing homes. Eur Res Telemed2017; 6: 59–65.
46.
ChanWHjelmN. The role of telenursing in the provision of geriatric outreach services to residential homes in Hong Kong. J Telemed Telecare2001; 7: 38–46.
47.
CorcoranHHuiEWooJ. The acceptability of telemedicine for podiatric intervention in a residential home for the elderly. J Telemed Telecare2003; 9: 146–149.
48.
HuiEWooJHjelmM, et al.Telemedicine: a pilot study in nursing home residents. Gerontology2001; 47: 82–87.
49.
HuiEWooJ. Telehealth for older patients: the Hong Kong experience. J Telemed Telecare2002; 8: 39–41.
50.
TangWKChiuHWooJ, et al.Telepsychiatry in psychogeriatric service: a pilot study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2001; 16: 88–93.
51.
OhtaRRyuYSatoM, et al.ICT-driven improvement of interprofessional collaboration between a rural clinic and nursing home: a mixed method. J Interprof Educ Pract2020; 21: 100380.
52.
JanardhananLLeowYHChioMT, et al.Experience with the implementation of a web-based teledermatology system in a nursing home in Singapore. J Telemed Telecare2008; 14: 404–409.
53.
TohHChiaJKohE, et al.Virtual geriatric care: user perception of telegeriatrics in nursing homes of Singapore. In: International conference on information and communication technologies for ageing well and e-health, 2015, pp.91–105: Springer.
54.
VowdenKVowdenP. A pilot study on the potential of remote support to enhance wound care for nursing-home patients. J Wound Care2013; 22: 481–488.
55.
HsuM-HChuT-BYenJ-C, et al.Development and implementation of a national telehealth project for long-term care: a preliminary study. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2010; 97: 286–292.
56.
SternAMitsakakisNPauldenM, et al.Pressure ulcer multidisciplinary teams via telemedicine: a pragmatic cluster randomized stepped wedge trial in long term care. BMC Health Serv Res2014; 14: 1–13.
57.
PerriG-AAbdel-MalekNBandaliA, et al.Early integration of palliative care in a long-term care home: a telemedicine feasibility pilot study. Palliat Support Care2020; 18: 460–467.
58.
McGiltonKSHeathHChuCH, et al.Moving the agenda forward: a person-centred framework in long-term care. Int J Older People Nurs2012; 7: 303–309.
59.
VassbøTKKirkevoldMEdvardssonD, et al.The meaning of working in a person-centred way in nursing homes: a phenomenological-hermeneutical study. BMC Nurs2019; 18: 1–8.
60.
AroraVMChivuMSchramA, et al.Implementing physical distancing in the hospital: a key strategy to prevent nosocomial transmission of COVID-19. J Hosp Med2020; 15: 290–291.
61.
Archbald-PannoneLRHarrisDAAlberoK, et al.COVID-19 collaborative model for an academic hospital and long-term care facilities. J Am Med Dir Assoc2020; 21: 939–942.
62.
MontoyaAJenqGMillsJP, et al.Partnering with local hospitals and public health to manage COVID-19 outbreaks in nursing homes. J Am Geriatr Soc2021; 69: 30–36.
63.
FathiJTModinHEScottJD. Nurses advancing telehealth services in the era of healthcare reform. Online J Issues Nurs2017; 22: 1320–1325.
64.
GrabowskiDCStewartKABroderickSM, et al.Predictors of nursing home hospitalization: a review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev2008; 65: 3–39.
65.
HagerBHasselbergMArzubiE, et al.Leveraging behavioral health expertise: practices and potential of the project ECHO approach to virtually integrating care in underserved areas. Psychiatr Serv2018; 69: 366–369.
66.
KovacevicPDragicSKovacevicT, et al.Impact of weekly case-based tele-education on quality of care in a limited resource medical intensive care unit. Crit Care2019; 23: 1–7.
67.
GleasonLJMartinchekMLongM, et al.An innovative model using telementoring to provide geriatrics education for nurses and social workers at skilled nursing facilities⋆. Geriatr Nurs2019; 40: 517–521.
68.
BroensTHHuis in’t VeldRMHAVollenbroek-HuttenMMR, et al. Determinants of successful telemedicine implementations: a literature study. J Telemed Telecare2007; 13: 303–309.
69.
RicciMACaputoMPCallasPW, et al.The use of telemedicine for delivering continuing medical education in rural communities. Telemed J e-Health2005; 11: 124–129.
70.
BrebnerJBrebnerERuddick-BrackenH. Experience-based guidelines for the implementation of telemedicine services. J Telemed Telecare2005; 11: 3–5.
71.
Jarvis-SelingerSChanEPayneR, et al.Clinical telehealth across the disciplines: lessons learned. Telemed e-Health2008; 14: 720–725.
72.
MarshallABidmeadE. Using telemedicine in practice: implications for workforce development. Int J Pract-Based Learn Health Soc Care2018; 6: 111–124.
73.
BarlowJBayerSCastletonB, et al.Meeting government objectives for telecare in moving from local implementation to mainstream services. J Telemed Telecare2005; 11: 49–51.
74.
BezboruahKCPaulsonDSmithJ. Management attitudes and technology adoption in long-term care facilities. J Health Organ Manag2014; 28: 344–365.
75.
IfinedoP. Technology acceptance by health professionals in Canada: An analysis with a modified UTAUT model. In: 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2012, pp.2937–2946: IEEE.
76.
JacobCSanchez-VazquezAIvoryC. Social, organizational, and technological factors impacting clinicians’ adoption of mobile health tools: systematic literature review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth2020; 8: e15935.
77.
ScottWR. Institutional theory: contributing to a theoretical research program. Great minds in management: The process of theory development2005; 37: 460–484.
78.
SikkaNCombsDLumN, et al.Layperson telepresenters: increasing capacity for telehealth in underserved communities. Telemed e-Health2020; 27: 99–101.
79.
LeRougeCGarfieldMJCollinsRW. Telemedicine: technology mediated service relationship, encounter, or something else?Int J Med Inf2012; 81: 622–636.
80.
MillerEA. The continuing need to investigate the nature and content of teleconsultation communication using interaction analysis techniques. J Telemed Telecare2011; 17: 55–64.
81.
DalleyDRahmanRIvaldiA. Health care professionals’ and patients’ management of the interactional practices in telemedicine videoconferencing: a conversation analytic and discursive systematic review. Qual Health Res2021; 31: 804–814.
82.
SilénMSkyttBEngströmM. Relationships between structural and psychological empowerment, mediated by person-centred processes and thriving for nursing home staff. Geriatr Nurs2019; 40: 67–71.
83.
PappasYSealeC. The physical examination in telecardiology and televascular consultations: a study using conversation analysis. Patient Educ Couns2010; 81: 113–118.
84.
van HouwelingenCTMoermanAHEttemaRG, et al.Competencies required for nursing telehealth activities: a Delphi-study. Nurse Educ Today2016; 39: 50–62.
85.
EdirippuligeSBrooksPCaratiC, et al.It's important, but not important enough: eHealth as a curriculum priority in medical education in Australia. J Telemed Telecare2018; 24: 697–702.
86.
HenryBWBlockDECieslaJR, et al.Clinician behaviors in telehealth care delivery: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ2017; 22: 869–888.
87.
StanberryB. Legal and ethical aspects of telemedicine. J Telemed Telecare2006; 12: 166–175.
88.
KramerGMKinnJTMishkindMC. Legal, regulatory, and risk management issues in the use of technology to deliver mental health care. Cogn Behav Pract2015; 22: 258–268.
89.
WeinerMSchadowGLindberghD, et al. Clinicians’ and patients’ experiences and satisfaction with unscheduled, nighttime, internet-based video conferencing for assessing acute medical problems in a nursing facility. In: AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings2003, p.709. American Medical Informatics Association.
90.
EllisDGMayroseJ. The success of emergency telemedicine at the state university of New York at Buffalo. Telemed J E Health2003; 9: 73–79.
91.
KonAAMarcinJP. Using telemedicine to improve communication during paediatric resuscitations. J Telemed Telecare2005; 11: 261–264.
92.
BhaskarSBradleySChattuVK, et al.Telemedicine across the globe-position paper from the COVID-19 pandemic health system resilience PROGRAM (REPROGRAM) international consortium (part 1). Front Public Health2020; 8: 644.
93.
PetersonJPearcePFFergusonLA, et al.Understanding scoping reviews: definition, purpose, and process. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract2017; 29: 12–16.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
