Cited by 27Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealth Policy Implementation ScienceMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Implementation science perspectives on implementing telemedicine interventions for hypertension or diabetes management: scoping review

Open access
Khalid, Ayisha, Dong, Quanfang, Chuluunbaatar, Enkhzaya, Haldane, Victoria, Durrani, Hammad, Wei, Xiaolin·2023·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and diabetes are becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. Telemedicine is an accessible and cost-effective means of supporting hypertension and diabetes management, especially as the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of technological solutions for care. However, to date, no review has examined the contextual factors that influence the implementation of telemedicine interventions for hypertension or diabetes worldwide. OBJECTIVE: We adopted a comprehensive implementation research perspective to synthesize the barriers to and facilitators of implementing telemedicine interventions for the management of hypertension, diabetes, or both. METHODS: We performed a scoping review involving searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify studies published in English from 2017 to 2022 describing barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of telemedicine interventions for hypertension and diabetes management. The coding and synthesis of barriers and facilitators were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Of the 17,687 records identified, 35 (0.2%) studies were included in our scoping review. We found that facilitators of and barriers to implementation were dispersed across the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Barriers related to cost, patient needs and resources (eg, lack of consideration of language needs, culture, and rural residency), and personal attributes of patients (eg, demographics and priorities) were the most common. Facilitators related to the design and packaging of the intervention (eg, user-friendliness), patient needs and resources (eg, personalized information that leveraged existing strengths), implementation climate (eg, intervention embedded into existing infrastructure), knowledge of and beliefs about the intervention (eg, convenience of telemedicine), and other personal attributes (eg, technical literacy) were the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the successful implementation of telemedicine interventions for hypertension and diabetes requires comprehensive efforts at the planning, execution, engagement, and reflection and evaluation stages of intervention implementation to address challenges at the individual, interpersonal, organizational, and environmental levels.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/42134

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 77 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Facts and figures International Diabetes Federation 2021 12 09 2022-05-19 https://idf.org/aboutdiabetes/what-is-diabetes/facts-figures.html 35914061
  2. [43]Better systematic review management Covidence 2022 04 20 2023-02-20 https://www.covidence.org/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khalid, A., Dong, Q., Chuluunbaatar, E., Haldane, V., Durrani, H., & Wei, X.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Wei, Xiaolin
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2023-03-14
Volume
25
Pages
e42134
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4318443094
Cited by
27
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
University of Toronto
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
telemedicine, antihypertensive therapy, diabetes management, implementation barriers, implementation facilitators, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, technological literacy, implementation climate, language and cultural barriers, rural patients, COVID-19 pandemic
MeSH terms
Implementation Science, Diabetes Mellitus, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Hypertension, Patient Care Management, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review