None.

Executive summary Purpose This document aims to provide wound care clinicians with a rapid and structured overview of the key issues related to use of eHealth applications (telemedicine and telehealth) within wound care. This includes: An overview of terminology and available literature Guidance on the methodology for evaluation of eHealth solutions An introduction to and discussion of the potential benefits of eHealth technologies in wound care, and the possible barriers to their implementation Recommendations for ensuring a good implementation process and supporting involvement of wound care professionals in safeguarding that eHealth solutions meet the needs of the patients. Methodology The document sections lean on the structure and focus areas of the Model for ASsessment of Telemedicine (MAST) which defines crucial items to evaluate an eHealth application. The content of the document is developed on the basis of a literature review, identifying available documentation for use of eHealth solutions in wound care. Furthermore, it draws on various key documents recently published on the general development, evaluation and implementation of eHealth solutions. These include valuable up-to-date information relevant for any group of clinicians wishing to follow and influence the way eHealth solutions are integrated into clinical practice. Findings and conclusions The literature review revealed that the amount and level of evidence for use of eHealth applications in wound care is still limited. Some MAST domains are not examined in any of the available studies. Thus, more research is required to identify the potential benefits and harms to patients, and the possible challenges related to implementation of eHealth solutions in wound care. Potential barriers and facilitators for the implementation of eHealth applications into wound care practice are identified in the document, and these may all either enhance or impede the process. However, the available research does demonstrate patient satisfaction, improved access to health services for all client cohorts, and increased job satisfaction for clinicians. The document recommends that wound management clinicians, considering the use of eHealth applications in their clinical practice, consult widely and conduct regular evaluation of the outcomes to ensure efficient implementation of these services. To support this approach, steps to ensure a good implementation process within a given organisation have been proposed. These are synthesised into a three circle model.

No abstract

The Hawthorne Effect (HE) is considered a methodological artefact in research, although its definition and influence on research outcomes lack consensus. This review explored how this term has been mentioned and discussed in the area of wound research. A scoping review was conducted on ProQuest Central, Scopus, EbscoHost, and online databases of indexed wound journals using the methodological framework by Arksey and Malley. A review protocol was applied to detail key terms, truncation and Boolean operators, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search findings were reported using PRISMA guidelines. A total of 38 articles reporting primary evidence were identified. Three themes emerged from the review: wound researchers' awareness of HE, the acknowledgement of the existence or otherwise of HE, and the mentioning of HE in passing. These results reflect a lack of attention to and understanding and awareness of the HE in the area of wound research. It is suggested that the HE receives more attention as a methodological concern, and its potential influence is considered and mitigated when planning future studies. Recommendations are provided to minimise the impact of the HE on the rigour of the research and confidence afforded to research findings.