Jeg vil legge til følgende bemerkning: Det er viktig å påpeke at digitale helsetjenester ikke er hensiktsmessig for alle pasienter og brukere helt ennå. Vi trenger fortsatt muligheten til å differensiere basert på individuelle ønsker og behov.
I tillegg er det, som tidligere nevnt, ikke nødvendigvis noen motsetning mellom «varme hender» og «kald teknologi». Det handler ikke om teknologi versus sykepleie og omsorg. Det handler om at sykepleiere må ha muligheter til å bruke teknologien på en best mulig måte: for å møte omsorgsbehovet til hver enkelt pasient – nøyaktig det som er hensikten med enhver sykepleier–pasient-relasjon.
Denne fagartikkelen er basert på min prøveforelesning i forbindelse med doktorgradsdisputas i helse og medisin, Det helsevitenskapelige fakultet, Universitetet i Stavanger, 19. oktober 2018.
Referanser
1. Meld. St. 29 (2012–2013). Morgendagens omsorg. Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet; 2013.
2. Meld. St. 26 (2014–2015). Fremtidens primærhelsetjeneste – nærhet og helhet. Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet; 2014.
3. Meld. St. 27 (2015–2016). Digital agenda for Norge – IKT for en enklere hverdag og økt produktivitet. Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet; 2016.
4. Ferwerda M, van Beugen S, van Burik A, van Middendorp H, de Jong EMGJ, van de Kerkhof PCM, et al. What patients think about E-health: patients’ perspective on internet-based cognitive behavioral treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis. Clinical Rheumatology. 2013;32(6):869–73.
5. Hanlon P, Daines L, Campbell C, McKinstry B, Weller D, Pinnock H. Telehealth interventions to support self-management of long-term conditions: a systematic metareview of diabetes, heart failure, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cancer. Journal Of Medical Internet Research. 2017;19(5):e172.
6. Lie SS. An eHealth intervention based on Guided Self-determination program for adults with type 2 diabetes in general practice. Stavanger: Universitetet i Stavanger; 2018.
7. Lie SS, Karlsen B, Graue M, Oftedal B. The influence of an eHealth intervention for adults with type 2 diabetes on the patient–nurse relationship: a qualitative study. Scand J Caring Sci. 2019;33(3):741–49.
8. Barello S, Triberti S, Graffigna G, Libreri C, Serino S, Hibbard J, et al. eHealth for patient engagement: a systematic review. Front Psychol. 2015;6:2013.
9. Elbert JN, van Os-Medendorp H, van Renselaar W, Ekeland GA, Hakkaart-van Roijen L, Raat H, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of eHealth interventions in somatic diseases: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2014;16(4):e110.
10. O’Cathain A, Drabble JS, Foster A, Horspool K, Edwards L, Thomas C, et al. Being human: a qualitative interview study exploring why a telehealth intervention for management of chronic conditions had a modest effect. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2016;18(6):e163.
11. O’Connor S, Hanlon P, O’Donnell CA, Garcia S, Glanville J, Mair FS. Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMC medical informatics and decision making. 2016;16(1):120.
12. Varsi C, Gammon D, Ruland CM, Wibe T. Patients’ reported reasons for non-use of an internet-based patient-provider communication service: qualitative interview study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2013;15(11):e246.
13. Vatnøy TK, Thygesen E, Dale B. Telemedicine to support coping resources in home-living patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Patients’ experiences. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2017;23(1):126–32.
14. Lie SS, Karlsen B, Niemiec CP, Graue M, Oftedal B. Written reflection in an eHealth intervention for adults with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study. Patient preference and adherence. 2018;12:311–20.
15. Lie SS, Karlsen B, Oord ER, Graue M, Oftedal B. Dropout from an eHealth intervention for adults with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2017;19(5):e187.
16. Nagel DA, Penner JL. Conceptualizing telehealth in nursing practice: advancing a conceptual model to fill a virtual gap. J Holist Nurs. 2016;34(1):91–104.
17. Strandas M, Bondas T. The nurse-patient relationship as a story of health enhancement in community care: a meta-ethnography. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2018;74(1):11–22.
18. Zoffmann V, Hörnsten Å, Storbækken S, Graue M, Rasmussen B, Wahl A, et al. Translating person-centered care into practice: a comparative analysis of motivational interviewing, illness-integration support, and guided self-determination. Patient education and counseling. 2016;99(3):400–7.
19. Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med. 2000;51:1087–110.
20. McWilliam C. Patients, persons or partners? Involving those with chronic disease in their care. Chronic Illness. 2009;5:277–92.
21. Greengard S. Living in a digital world. Communications of the ACM. 2011;54(10):17–9.
22. NOU 2011: 11. Innovasjon i omsorg. Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet; 2011.
23. van Houwelingen CTM, Moerman AH, Ettema RGA, Kort HSM, Ten Cate O. Competencies required for nursing telehealth activities: a Delphi-study. Nurse Education Today. 2016;39(C):50–62.
24. Pols J, Moser I. Cold technologies versus warm care? On affective and social relations with and through care technologies. Alter – European Journal of Disability research, Revue européen de recherche sur le handicap. 2009;3(2):159–78.
25. Grumme SV, Barry DC, Gordon CS, Ray AM. On virtual presence. Advances in Nursing Science. 2016;39(1):48–59.