Versorgungsbezogene E-Health-Anwendungen und Lebensqualität: Empirische Befunde und konzeptuelle Perspektiven

Abstract

As for other health care services, e-Health applications are implemented with the general objective to improve the quality of life of their users. This holds not equally true for all applications, but it is frequently stated for patient-side e-Health services.A descriptive review of the literature indicates that in general there is no substantial impact of selected e-Health applications on patient-reported quality of life. Moreover, empirical findings are insufficient or lacking for several e-Health applications. Patient satisfaction is more often included in e-Health studies investigating the impact of e-Health applications on patient-reported outcomes, whereas patient-reported experiences are increasingly important.Given the diversity of e-Health applications and respective intended outcomes, it is concluded that the assessment of quality of life should become more context-sensitive and application-specific, including domains and facets that are specifically appropriate to e-Health settings. Moreover, patient-reported experiences (e. g. patient safety) should be taken into account.

Measuring context that matters: validation of the modular Tele-QoL patient-reported outcome and experience measure

“…Any aspects related to the context of healthcare, that might influence QoL beyond treatment, were hardly considered so far [ 3 – 5 ]. As part of the digitalization of healthcare, medical procedures and therapeutic treatment strategies are made available within the context of telemedicine (TM; [ 6 ]). Furthermore, additional health services are provided through innovative solutions, like telemonitoring [ 7 – 11 ].…”

Setting-Sensitive Conceptualization and Assessment of Quality of Life in Telemedical Care—Study Protocol of the Tele-QoL Project

“…Although there is some documentation that using TM applications can improve QoL [ 4 ], many findings remain inconsistent [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. As such, the reported effects are often not clinically relevant or statistically significant, and they also differ depending on the disease groups studied [ 13 , 14 ]. From a methodological perspective, QoL is frequently assessed with standardized instruments that do not sufficiently represent the most important aspects of the intended outcomes of TM applications.…”

“…There are challenges in the comparability due to the heterogeneity of TM applications, models of care, and the different target groups [ 18 ]. Additionally, effects on QoL are often limited to a selection of specific scales and long-term effects are usually not evaluated [ 13 , 14 ]. Thus, there is a need for a generic patient-centered measurement approach that can capture the expected overall impact of TM [ 19 ].…”