Sara Eklind, Mia Hylén, Carl-Johan Orre, Eva Åkerman
Digital diaries were perceived by patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals as influencing communication, continuity, and engagement in care. Patients highlighted reflection, increased awareness, and participation, while relatives emphasised connection and involvement. Healthcare professionals focused on usability, workflow integration, and organisational conditions shaping use. They were perceived as valuable when they supported communication and made patients' experiences more visible, but as less useful when poorly integrated into clinical routines. Their perceived value depended on how they were embedded in practice and shaped by interactions between users, technology, and organisational context.
AIM: To map literature on perceptions of patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals regarding the use of digital diaries in healthcare, to inform pre-implementation of an ICU diary by identifying factors relevant to feasibility, acceptability, and integration into ICU workflows.
METHODS: The review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. Studies including patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals with experience of digital diary use in healthcare settings were eligible. Included studies reported perceptions of digital diaries. Data were synthesised using inductive content analysis.
FINDINGS: From 679 identified records, 13 studies (2014-2025) were included, covering symptom diaries (n = 7) and ICU diaries (n = 6). The synthesis generated three overarching categories across user groups: relational connectedness and person-centred care; empowerment and meaning-making; and implementation and technological readiness. Across contexts, digital diaries were described as shaping communication, participation, and continuity of care, while also enabling reflection and meaning-making during illness and recovery. However, their perceived value was highly context-dependent and shaped by implementation conditions.
CONCLUSIONS: Digital diaries were perceived by patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals as influencing communication, continuity, and engagement in care. Patients highlighted reflection, increased awareness, and participation, while relatives emphasised connection and involvement. Healthcare professionals focused on usability, workflow integration, and organisational conditions shaping use. They were perceived as valuable when they supported communication and made patients' experiences more visible, but as less useful when poorly integrated into clinical routines. Their perceived value depended on how they were embedded in practice and shaped by interactions between users, technology, and organisational context.
IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Digital diaries have the potential to support communication, involvement, and continuity of care. However, realising this potential requires deliberate integration into clinical workflows, role definition, and user-centred design. Ongoing evaluation is essential, particularly in ICU contexts where experiential and person-centred outcomes remain underexplored.