Key result
A systematic review of 21 articles found that digital tools like virtual reality and telehealth offer clinical advantages in cardiac reperfusion but are limited by cost and ineffective interfaces.
Why the study?
There is a growing impetus to understand how digital tools must integrate into existing clinical pathways to positively impact patient and organisational outcomes in cardiac reperfusion surgeries.
Does the use of digital technology (virtual reality, mHealth, telehealth) improve patient and organizational outcomes in cardiac reperfusion pathways?
Systematic Review (n=21)
Does the use of digital technology (virtual reality, mHealth, telehealth) improve patient and organizational outcomes in cardiac reperfusion pathways?
Digital technologies such as virtual reality and telehealth offer clinical advantages in cardiac reperfusion pathways, though implementation is currently limited by cost and training requirements.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Digital tools show mostly positive clinical and organizational effects in reperfusion pathways; extends sparse evidence on VR, mHealth, and telehealth while highlighting implementation barriers.
With health and surgery increasingly aided by digital technologies, there exists a growing impetus to understand how such tools must integrate into existing clinical pathways to ensure a positive impact on patient and organisational outcomes. Consequently, this study sought to collate evidence on the use of digital technology in cardiac reperfusion surgeries. We systematically searched three scientific databases for relevant articles. In total, 1,092 articles were retrieved, with 126 screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 21 selected for analysis. Articles reported on the use of virtual reality, mHealth and telehealth in cardiovascular reperfusion procedures, ranging from surgical training regimens to postoperative rehabilitation. Here, despite clinical advantages, limitations were highlighted, including cost, ineffective interfaces and extensive training needed to operate novel digital tools. Nevertheless with further development and input from patient stakeholders, many limitations look set to dematerialise and provide tangible improvements to the benefit of patients and hard-pressed health institutions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chhatwal et al. (2024) conducted a systematic review in cardiac reperfusion surgeries (n=21). Digital tools (virtual reality, mHealth, telehealth) was evaluated. A systematic review of 21 articles found that digital tools like virtual reality and telehealth offer clinical advantages in cardiac reperfusion but are limited by cost and ineffective interfaces.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: