IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i9p5184-d801280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Utility Framework for COVID-19 Online Forward Triage Tools: A Swiss Telehealth Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Janet Michel

    (Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Annette Mettler

    (Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Martin Müller

    (Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Wolf E. Hautz

    (Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Thomas C. Sauter

    (Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital, University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland)

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic caused a surge in online tools commonly known as symptom checkers. The purpose of these symptom checkers was mostly to reduce the health system burden by providing worried people with testing criteria, where to test and how to self-care. Technical, usability and organizational challenges with regard to online forward triage tools have also been reported. Very few of these online forward triage tools have been evaluated. Evidence for decision frameworks may be of particular value in a pandemic setting where time frames are restricted, uncertainties are ubiquitous and the evidence base is changing rapidly. The objective was to develop a framework to evaluate the utility of COVID-19 online forward triage tools. The development of the online forward triage tool utility framework was conducted in three phases. The process was guided by the socio-ecological framework for adherence that states that patient (individual), societal and broader structural factors affect adherence to the tool. In a further step, pragmatic incorporation of themes on the utility of online forward triage tools that emerged from our study as well as from the literature was performed. Seven criteria emerged; tool accessibility, reliability as an information source, medical decision-making aid, allaying fear and anxiety, health system burden reduction, onward forward transmission reduction and systems thinking (usefulness in capacity building, planning and resource allocation, e.g., tests and personal protective equipment). This framework is intended to be a starting point and a generic tool that can be adapted to other online forward triage tools beyond COVID-19. A COVID-19 online forward triage tool meeting all seven criteria can be regarded as fit for purpose. How useful an OFTT is depends on its context and purpose.

Suggested Citation

  • Janet Michel & Annette Mettler & Martin Müller & Wolf E. Hautz & Thomas C. Sauter, 2022. "A Utility Framework for COVID-19 Online Forward Triage Tools: A Swiss Telehealth Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-10, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5184-:d:801280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5184/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/9/5184/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malcolm Langford, 2010. "A Poverty of Rights: Six Ways to Fix the MDGs," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(1), pages 83-91, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabrina Haroon & Teck Chuan Voo & Hillary Chua & Gan Liang Tan & Titus Lau, 2022. "Telemedicine and Haemodialysis Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Integrative Review of Patient Safety, Healthcare Quality, Ethics and the Legal Considerations in Singapore Practice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-13, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diane F. Frey & Gillian MacNaughton, 2016. "A Human Rights Lens on Full Employment and Decent Work in the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(2), pages 21582440166, June.
    2. Jan Vandemoortele, 2011. "Forum 2011," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 42(1), pages 1-21, January.
    3. Keith R. Skene, 2021. "No goal is an island: the implications of systems theory for the Sustainable Development Goals," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 9993-10012, July.
    4. Matthieu Boussichas & Tancrede Voituriez & Julie Vaillé, 2019. "Tackling inequalities and vulnerabilities: Why and how G7 development policies could do better," Working Papers hal-02288094, HAL.
    5. O. Flores Baquero & J. Gallego-Ayala & R. Giné-Garriga & A. Jiménez-Fernández. Palencia & A. Pérez-Foguet, 2017. "The Influence of the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation Normative Content in Measuring the Level of Service," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 763-786, September.
    6. Norichika Kanie & Naoya Abe & Masahiko Iguchi & Jue Yang & Ngeta Kabiri & Yuto Kitamura & Shunsuke Mangagi & Ikuho Miyazawa & Simon Olsen & Tomohiro Tasaki & Taro Yamamoto & Tetsuro Yoshida & Yuka Hay, 2014. "Integration and Diffusion in Sustainable Development Goals: Learning from the Past, Looking into the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Håvard Mokleiv Nygård, 2017. "Achieving the sustainable development agenda: The governance – conflict nexus," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 20(1), pages 3-18, March.
    8. Oana Forestier & Rakhyun E. Kim, 2020. "Cherry‐picking the Sustainable Development Goals: Goal prioritization by national governments and implications for global governance," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1269-1278, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:9:p:5184-:d:801280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.