No abstract

Aim This study aimed to evaluate the patients' satisfaction with using store-and-forward voice and text messaging teleconsultation service to provide primary health care to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method A cross-sectional survey was conducted between October 1 and December 1, 2020, in Iran. The study population consisted of patients who used the service. Three hundred-ninety-six patients were enrolled in the study by convenience sampling. Data were collected by a researcher-made questionnaire. The face, comprehensibility, and content validity of the questionnaire were tested and met. The reliability of this questionnaire was confirmed (r = 0.9). Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression were conducted. Data were analyzed using STATA 14.0 software. Results In total, 396 patients responded to the online questionnaire. The mean age of patients was 37 ± 10.31 years. More than half of them had an academic degree (65.40 %). Teleconsultation was considered satisfactory by 172 patients (43.43 %), while more than half of the patients (56.57 %) were unsatisfied with teleconsultation. In terms of "quality of care provided" and "patient information privacy" components, around 41 % of patients were satisfied. However, the number of patients who feel satisfied with teleconsultation's similarity to a face-to-face encounter was lower (37.88 %). The results showed no significant relationship between age, gender, education, and overall satisfaction (p > 0.05). The association between overall satisfaction and health status was (AOR = 1.51, 95 % CI = 1.16–1.96). Conclusion More than half of patients from our study did not have a good experience with teleconsultation. This is also partially due to the use of existing communication platform, instead of custom-made solution. It is necessary to improve the services' quality and meet patients' needs to optimize patients' experience, particularly during a health crisis, resulting in better health outcomes and end-user satisfaction.

Introduction The United Nations has defined disaster as a severe disruption that can change the normal condition and it exceeds the capacity and resources of the affected community (1). Disasters are divided into two basics categories: natural and man-made. Earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, floods, and fires are listed as natural disasters. War, pollution, nuclear explosions, fires, hazardous materials exposures, explosions, and transportation accidents are named as man-made disasters (2). Only in one year, these generated around 40 million homeless and too many deaths in the developed world (3). The cost in this period is about two thousand and a half billion of US dollars (4). These damages sometimes take years to repair, and others can never be repaired. Since disasters are often a sudden and shocking fact, they require quick and error-free decisions. It is necessary to have predetermined planning and strategies to respond appropriately, preserve the remaining lives and resources, and reduce pain and suffering. In other words, we need disaster management (5). The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies defines disaster management as to how we "prepare for, respond to, and learn from the effects of major failures" (6). High costs, inadequate budgets, inappropriate approaches, weakness of alert systems, inappropriate knowledge and motivation, and inadequate awareness of technology are the challenges that disaster management must address them (7). Lack of proper facilities for collecting, processing, and transmitting important

Background: Although the systematic reviews regarding telemedicine have increased in recent decades, no comprehensive studies have been conducted to review these systematic reviews. The present study aimed to review the published systematic reviews regarding telemedicine applications for the report and appraisal of several aspects. Methods: The literature search was performed in the PubMed database for the systematic reviews published during January 2010-June 2020 in the field of telemedicine using “telemedicine” Mesh terms. The extracted data from the selected articles were the year of publication, telemedicine specialty, clinical outcomes, cost evaluation, and satisfaction assessment. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics. Results: Among 746 retrieved articles, 191 cases were selected and reviewed. Most of the studies were focused on telemedicine (n=35; 18.3%), followed by telerehabilitation (n=22; 11.5%), tele-diabetes (n=18; 9.4%), telecardiology (n=16; 8.3%), home telecare (n=13; 6.8%), telepsychiatry (n=12; 6.3%), teledermatology (n=11; 5.7%), and teleneurology (n=9; 4.7%). The selected studies were primarily focused on clinical outcomes (72.7%), followed by cost-effectiveness (32.4%) and user satisfaction (29.3%). In addition, they mostly indicated that telemedicine services yielded acceptable clinical outcomes (72.5%), cost-effectiveness (67.7%), and healthcare provider/patient satisfaction (83.9%). Conclusion: Although telerehabilitation, tele-diabetes, telecardiology, home telecare, and telepsychiatry were studied further, there are still some specific specialties such as teleradiology, telepathology, and telepediatric that should be considered more. Moreover, investigation of various outcomes could result in a more comprehensive view of this field. Therefore, further investigations in this regard would improve telemedicine applications and encourage potential telemedicine providers to initiate these applications.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a web-based health information intervention on knowledge, care burden and attitudes of family caregivers of patients with dementia. This study is a unblinded randomised controlled trial. The study population consisted of family caregivers of patients with dementia ( n = 50) which were randomly allocated to the intervention group (access to the web-based health information) or control group (access to information as usual). The participants completed knowledge, care burden and attitude questionnaire at baseline and at two months follow-up. A total of 50 caregivers participated in this study. Before the intervention, there was no statistically significant difference between the knowledge, care burden and attitude score between the two groups ( p > 0.001). In comparison to the control group after the intervention, participants in the intervention group showed significant improvements in all outcomes ( p < 0.001). These findings provide further evidence that web-based information interventions helped caregivers feel more confident, empathetic and concerned about dementia care with less care burden.