Abstract Background Many elderly people suffer from chronic health conditions and mobility limitations. Therefore, they may benefit from traditional rehabilitation or telerehabilitation interventions as an alternative for this type of services. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of telerehabilitation interventions with traditional rehabilitation services for therapeutic purposes in the elderly. Methods This systematic review was conducted in 2018. The searched databases were Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and ProQuest. The search was conducted with no time or language limitation. The selected papers included the randomized clinical trial studies in which elderly people aged 60 and over used telerehabilitation services for treatment purposes. The quality of the studies was evaluated by using the physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) scale. Data were extracted by using a data extraction form and findings were narratively synthesized. Results After screening the retrieved papers, eight articles were selected to be included in the study. According to the findings, telerehabilitation was used for the elderly after stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), total knee replacement, and in patients with the comorbidity of COPD and chronic heart failure. Overall, in most studies, there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups and the level of improvements was similar for most outcomes. Conclusion Telerehabilitation services can be regarded as an alternative to traditional rehabilitation approaches to reduce outpatient resource utilization and improve quality of life. However, more rigorous studies are suggested to investigate the effectiveness of telerehabilitation services for specific diseases or health conditions.

Background Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) for Prescribing are one of the innovations designed to improve physician practice performance and patient outcomes by reducing prescription errors. This study was therefore conducted to examine the effects of various CDSSs on physician practice performance and patient outcomes. Methods This systematic review was carried out by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2019. The studies were independently reviewed by two researchers. Any discrepancies in the eligibility of the studies between the two researchers were then resolved by consulting the third researcher. In the next step, we performed a meta-analysis based on medication subgroups, CDSS-type subgroups, and outcome categories. Also, we provided the narrative style of the findings. In the meantime, we used a random-effects model to estimate the effects of CDSS on patient outcomes and physician practice performance with a 95% confidence interval. Q statistics and I2 were then used to calculate heterogeneity. Results On the basis of the inclusion criteria, 45 studies were qualified for analysis in this study. CDSS for prescription drugs/COPE has been used for various diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases, AIDS, appendicitis, kidney disease, malaria, high blood potassium, and mental diseases. In the meantime, other cases such as concurrent prescribing of multiple medications for patients and their effects on the above-mentioned results have been analyzed. The study shows that in some cases the use of CDSS has beneficial effects on patient outcomes and physician practice performance (std diff in means = 0.084, 95% CI 0.067 to 0.102). It was also statistically significant for outcome categories such as those demonstrating better results for physician practice performance and patient outcomes or both. However, there was no significant difference between some other cases and traditional approaches. We assume that this may be due to the disease type, the quantity, and the type of CDSS criteria that affected the comparison. Overall, the results of this study show positive effects on performance for all forms of CDSSs. Conclusions Our results indicate that the positive effects of the CDSS can be due to factors such as user-friendliness, compliance with clinical guidelines, patient and physician cooperation, integration of electronic health records, CDSS, and pharmaceutical systems, consideration of the views of physicians in assessing the importance of CDSS alerts, and the real-time alerts in the prescription.

Background Telehealth technology and related products can help to solve the problems associated with providing health care services and equal distribution of resources. However, in order to run a telehealth business successfully, key components and critical factors need to be taken into account. A telehealth business framework can provide a rich understanding of these components and factors. Therefore, the present study aimed to identify the key components and critical factors for developing a telehealth business framework from the experts’ perspectives. Methods The present qualitative study was conducted in 2020. The participants were 22 experts in the fields of medical informatics, health information management, telemedicine, telehealth, health entrepreneurship, health insurance, and digital health start-ups. In depth semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data, and the data were analyzed using framework analysis. Results Four main themes derived from data analysis. The themes included key components for developing a telehealth business framework, success factors, challenges, and barriers of a telehealth business. Overall, the results indicated that the key components in a telehealth business framework included created value, key resources, key activities, key partners, licenses and permissions, product pricing, revenue, marketing, supporting services, and getting feedback from customers. Although receiving support from different individuals and organizations as well as economic benefits of telehealth services may consider as success factors, there are a number of challenges and barriers which should be taken into account. Otherwise, these factors may hinder the success of a telehealth business. Conclusions The development of a telehealth business framework might be an important step towards developing a more complete business plan, facilitating the commercialization of telehealth products, and providing a solution for product sustainability in a competitive market. In the current study, the key components and critical factors for developing a telehealth business framework were identified; however, further research is needed to explore how these components and factors can be helpful in developing business plans and running a successful telehealth business.

Background Telehealth technology is an excellent solution to resolve the problems of health care delivery. However, this technology may fail during large-scale implementation. As a result, business models can be used to facilitate commercialization of telehealth products and services. Objective The purpose of this study was to review different types of business models or frameworks and their components used in the telehealth industry. Methods This was a systematic review conducted in 2020. The databases used for searching related articles included Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Emerald, and ProQuest. Google Scholar was also searched. These databases and Google Scholar were searched until the end of January 2020 and duplicate references were removed. Finally, articles meeting the inclusion criteria were selected and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist was used for appraising the strengths and limitations of each study. Data were extracted using a data extraction form, and the results were synthesized narratively. Results Initially, 4998 articles were found and after screening, 23 were selected to be included in the study. The results showed that new telehealth business models were presented in 13 studies, and the applications of the existing business models were reported in 10 studies. These studies were related to different types of services, namely, telemonitoring (4 studies), telemedicine (3 studies), mobile health (3 studies), telerehabilitation (3 studies), telehealth (2 studies), assisted living technologies (2 studies), sensor-based systems (2 studies), and mobile teledermoscopy, teleradiology, telecardiology, and teletreatment (1 study related to each area). In most of the business models, value proposition, financial variables, and revenue streams were the main components. Conclusions Applying business models in the commercialization of telehealth services will be useful to gain a better understanding of the required components, market challenges, and possible future changes. The results showed that different business models can be used for different telehealth technologies in various health systems and cultures. However, it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of these models in practice. Moreover, comparing the usefulness of these models in different domains of telehealth services will help identify the strengths and weaknesses of these models for future optimization.

Background Telehealth services can utilize various information technologies and improve quality and efficiency of healthcare delivery by facilitating education, treatment, follow-up, and decision-making. However, these services are not always commercialized, and in case of commercialization, there is no guarantee for their long-term sustainability in market. Therefore, business models and frameworks are used as part of commercialization processes to identify a set of factors affecting the sustainability, effectiveness, and key business activities. The current study aimed to develop a telehealth business framework for Iran. Methods This research was conducted in 2021, and a mixed-methods approach was used for data collection. Initially, a telehealth business framework was developed based on the findings derived from a systematic review and a qualitative research. The proposed framework was then reviewed by an expert panel (n = 9) in which the participants had at least three years of work experience in telehealth. Finally, the framework was validated using the Delphi method (three rounds). Results The expert panel believed that some components such as partners’ expertise, required capital and financial resources, research and analysis, marketing and branding, tax, product registration, and marketing at scientific congresses and science and technology exhibitions needed to be added to the framework. In the Delphi study, 68 out of 74 components proposed in the initial framework were approved across four major dimensions; namely, prerequisites, production, payments and costs, and post-production services. Conclusions It seems that the developed framework can facilitate commercializing telehealth technologies and developing business plans. In addition, telehealth start-ups can use this framework and its various components in a competitive market to be more successful in their businesses. However, it is still critical to evaluate the effectiveness of the framework in practice and in relation to the commercialization of telehealth technologies.