Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of digital health interventions has expanded, particularly in home-based primary care (HBPC), following the increase in the older adult population and the need to respond to the higher demand of chronic conditions, weakness and loss of autonomy of this population. There was an even greater demand with COVID-19 and subsequent isolation/social distancing measures for this risk group. The objective of this study is to map and identify the uses and types of digital health interventions and their reported impacts on the quality of HBPC for older adults worldwide. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a scoping review protocol which will enable a rigorous, transparent and reliable synthesis of knowledge. The review will be developed from the theoretical perspective of Arksey and O'malley, with updates by Levac and Peters and respective collaborators based on the Joanna Briggs Institute manual, and guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Data from white literature will be extracted from multidisciplinary health databases such as: the Virtual Health Library, LILACS, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cinahl and Embase; while Google Scholar will be used for gray literature. No date limit or language restrictions will be determined. The quantitative data will be analyzed through descriptive statistics and qualitative data through thematic analysis. The results will be submitted to stakeholder consultation for preliminary sharing of the study and will later be disseminated through publication in open access scientific journals, scientific events and academic and community journals. The full scoping review report will present the main impacts, challenges, opportunities and gaps found in publications related to the use of digital technologies in primary home care. DISCUSSION: The organization of this protocol will increase the methodological rigor, quality, transparency and accuracy of scoping reviews, reducing the risk of bias.