BMC Health Services Research (Jan 2024)

Implementation of remote home care: assessment guided by the RE-AIM framework

  • Lina Oelschlägel,
  • Anne Moen,
  • Alfhild Dihle,
  • Vivi L. Christensen,
  • Kristin Heggdal,
  • Jane Österlind,
  • Simen A. Steindal

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10625-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Welfare technology interventions have become increasingly important in home-based palliative care for facilitating safe, time-efficient, and cost-effective methods to support patients living independently. However, studies evaluating the implementation of welfare technology innovations are scarce, and the empirical evidence for sustainable models using technology in home-based palliative care remains low. This study aimed to report on the use of the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to assess the implementation of remote home care (RHC) a technology-mediated service for home-living patients in the palliative phase of cancer. Furthermore, it aimed to explore areas of particular importance determining the sustainability of technologies for remote palliative home-based care. Methods A secondary analysis of data collected by semi-structured interviews with patients with cancer in the palliative phase, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) experienced with RHC was performed. A deductive reflexive thematic analysis using RE-AIM dimensions was conducted. Results Five themes illustrating the five RE-AIM dimensions were identified: (1) Reach: protective actions in recruitment - gatekeeping, (2) Effectiveness: potential to offer person-centered care, (3) Adoption: balancing high touch with high tech, (4) Implementation: moving towards a common understanding, and (5) Maintenance: adjusting to what really matters. The RE-AIM framework highlighted that RHC implementation for patients in the palliative phase of cancer was influenced by HCP gatekeeping behavior, concerns regarding abandoning palliative care as a high-touch specialty, and a lack of competence in palliative care. Although RHC facilitated improved routines in patients’ daily lives, it was perceived as a static service unable to keep pace with disease progression. Conclusions A person-centered approach that prioritizes individual needs and preferences is necessary for providing optimal care. Although technologies such as RHC are not a panacea, they can be integrated as support for increasingly strained health services.

Keywords