Goharinejad Saeideh, Hajesmaeel-Gohari Sadrieh, Jannati Nazanin, Goharinejad Samira, Bahaadinbeigy Kambiz
Medical Informatics Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Health Services Management Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2021 Dec 29;35:184. doi: 10.47176/mjiri.35.184. eCollection 2021.
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. 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. 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%). 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.
尽管近几十年来关于远程医疗的系统评价有所增加，但尚未开展全面的研究来回顾这些系统评价。本研究旨在回顾已发表的关于远程医疗应用几个方面的报告和评估的系统评价。在PubMed数据库中使用“远程医疗”主题词，对2010年1月至2020年6月期间发表的远程医疗领域的系统评价进行文献检索。从所选文章中提取的数据包括发表年份、远程医疗专业、临床结果、成本评估和满意度评估。使用描述性统计进行数据分析。在检索到的746篇文章中，选择了191例进行回顾。大多数研究集中在远程医疗（n = 35；18.3%），其次是远程康复（n = 22；11.5%）、远程糖尿病（n = 18；9.4%）、远程心脏病学（n = 16；8.3%）、家庭远程护理（n = 13；6.8%）、远程精神病学（n = 12；6.3%）、远程皮肤病学（n = 11；5.7%）和远程神经病学（n = 9；4.7%）。所选研究主要集中在临床结果（72.7%），其次是成本效益（32.4%）和用户满意度（29.3%）。此外，它们大多表明远程医疗服务产生了可接受的临床结果（72.5%）、成本效益（67.7%）以及医疗服务提供者/患者满意度（83.9%）。尽管对远程康复、远程糖尿病、远程心脏病学、家庭远程护理和远程精神病学进行了进一步研究，但仍有一些特定专业，如远程放射学、远程病理学和远程儿科学，应得到更多关注。此外，对各种结果的调查可能会使对该领域有更全面的认识。因此，在这方面的进一步研究将改善远程医疗应用，并鼓励潜在的远程医疗提供者启动这些应用。
