Background: Personalized medicine (PM) is an approach based on understanding the differences between patients with the same disease and represents a change from the “one size fits all” concept. According to this concept, appropriate therapies should be selected for specific groups of patients. PM makes it possible to predict whether a particular therapy will be effective for a particular patient. PM will still have to overcome many challenges and barriers before it can be successfully implemented in healthcare systems. However, it is essential to remember that PM is not a medical revolution but an evolution. Methods: Three focus groups were conducted, to achieve the purpose of this study, which was to identify the barriers and facilitators existing to the implementation of PM and to highlight existing practices in European countries. Focus group discussions covered the areas of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of personalized medicine. Results: This section describes the results of the focus groups that covered the areas of barriers and facilitators of personalized medicine implementation. Conclusions: Personalized medicine faces many challenges and barriers before it can be successfully implemented in health systems. The translation of PM to European countries, differences in regulations, high costs of new technologies, and reimbursement are the reasons for the delay in PM implementation.

Background/Objectives: Vaccination programs are essential for preventing infectious diseases, yet the effectiveness of these programs varies significantly across Central and Eastern European countries due to diverse socio-economic, cultural, and political influences. This study examines vaccination trends in Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, the Czech Republic, Poland, Ukraine, and Lithuania, focusing on misinformation, regional healthcare disparities, and socio-cultural factors on vaccination rates. Methods: A comprehensive review of national policies, vaccination rates, and factors influencing vaccine hesitancy was conducted across seven Central and Eastern European countries. Input from local health stakeholders and national data sources was analysed to contextualize vaccination patterns and challenges. Results: Significant cross-country variation was observed. Hungary and the Czech Republic reported consistently high coverage of mandatory childhood vaccinations, while Romania and Ukraine experienced severe declines in uptake, leading to outbreaks of measles and polio. Slovakia demonstrated low COVID-19 vaccination willingness, and Poland recorded a sharp increase in formal vaccine refusals. Conversely, Lithuania implemented successful campaigns that improved uptake, particularly for influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Differences were influenced by healthcare system structure, public trust, exposure to misinformation, and digital communication strategies. Conclusion: Addressing vaccine hesitancy requires targeted, context-sensitive communication and digital literacy programs. Additionally, policy reforms to enhance accessibility, particularly in rural areas, and real-time monitoring systems can strengthen vaccination rates. Cross-border collaboration and tailored public health campaigns addressing cultural and socio-economic challenges are necessary to improve immunization coverage in these regions.

Background: In recent years, rapid population ageing has become a worldwide phenomenon. Both electronic health services (eHealth) and mobile health services (mHealth) are becoming important components of healthcare delivery. The market for mHealth is growing extremely fast. However, despite the increasing investment and interest in eHealth, several challenges still need to be overcome to enable broader and more systematic implementation of ICT in healthcare. Methods: This study presents data from the survey “Barriers and facilitators of Personalised Medicine implementation- qualitative study under Regions4PerMed (H2020) project”. In addition, this paper discusses the results of the conference, Health Technology in Connected & Integrated Care, held under the Horizon 2020 project and interregional coordination for a fast and deep uptake of personalised health (Regions4Permed) (July 2020—online conference). The above sections were preceded by an analysis of existing articles. Results: The data obtained from the surveys show that the main barriers to the adoption of eHealth and mHealth are the lack of skills of seniors, but also the lack of user-friendly technology and a simple user interface. Access to individual data while ensuring its security and the lack of digitisation of medical data are also serious issues. In addition, medical digital solutions are overly fragmented due to national legislations that deviate from the General Data Protection Regulation. Conclusions: By using technological solutions, it is possible to improve diagnosis and treatment decisions, and better adapt treatment and reduce its duration and cost. However, there are still barriers to the development of eHealth. Clear recommendations for implementation are needed to enable further development of personalised eHealth and mHealth solutions

(1) Background: Personalised medicine (PM) is an innovative way to produce better patient outcomes by using an individualised or stratified approach to disease and treatment rather than a collective approach to treating patients. PM is a major challenge for all European healthcare systems. This article aims to identify the needs of citizens in terms of PM adaptation, as well as to provide insights into the barriers and facilitators categorised in relation to key stakeholders of their implementation. (2) Methods: This article presents data obtained from the survey “Barriers and facilitators of Personalised Medicine implementation—qualitative study under Regions4PerMed (H2020) project”. Semi-structured questions were included in the above-mentioned survey. The questions included both structured and unstructured segments in an online questionnaire (Google Forms). Data were compiled into a data base. The results of the research were presented in the study. The number of people who participated in the survey can be considered an insufficient sample size for statistical measurement. In order to avoid collecting unreliable data, the questionnaires were sent to various stakeholders of the Regions4PerMed project, which includes members of the Advisory Board of the Regions4PerMed Project, but also speakers of conferences and workshops, and participants in these events. The professional profiles of the respondents are also diverse. (3) Results: The insights on what would help in the adaptation of Personal Medicine to citizen needs have been categorised into 7 areas of need: education; finances; dissemination; data protection/IT/data sharing; system changes/governmental level; cooperation/collaboration; public/citizens. Barriers and facilitators have been categorised into ten key stakeholders of the implementation barriers: government and government agencies; medical doctors/practitioners; healthcare system; healthcare providers; patients and patient organisations; medical sector, scientific community, researchers, stakeholders; industry; technology developers; financial institutions; media. (4) Conclusions: Barriers to the implementation of Personalised Medicine are observed across Europe. The barriers and facilitators mentioned in the article need to be effectively managed in healthcare systems across Europe. There is an urgent need to remove as many barriers as possible and create as many facilitators as possible to implement personalized medicine in the European system.

Health and social care systems in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries have undergone significant changes and are currently dealing with serious problems of system disintegration, coordination and a lack of control over the market environment. The increased health needs related to the ageing society and epidemiological patterns in these countries also require funding needs to increase, rationing to be reformed, sectors to be integrated (the managed care approach), and an analytical information base to be developed if supervision of new technological approaches is to improve. The period of system transitions in CEE countries entailed significant changes in their health systems, including health care financing. Large deficits in the public financing of health systems were just one of the challenges arising from the economic downturn of the 1990s, which was coupled with inflation, increasing unemployment, low salaries, a large informal sector and tax evasion in a number of CEE countries. During the communist period, there was universal access to a wide range of health services, proving it difficult to retain this coverage. As a result, many states sought to ration publicly funded health services – for example, through patient cost-sharing or decreasing the scope of basic benefits. Yet, not all of these reform plans were implemented, and in fact, some were rolled back or not implemented at all due to a lack of social or political consensus. CEE health systems had come to practice implicit rationing in the form of under-the-table payments from patients, quasi-formal payments to providers to compensate for lack of funding, and long waiting lists forcing patients to the private sector. All these difficulties pose a challenge to the implementation of integrated care.

Remote monitoring could improve the management of symptoms, wishes, and needs of patients with heart failure receiving palliative care. However, an overview of existing instruments is lacking, and implementation challenges are poorly understood. To map and analyze existing instruments used to monitor symptoms, wishes, and needs in heart failure palliative care, and to evaluate their implementation. This scoping review, conducted as part of the HORIZON Europe-funded RAPHAEL project, followed the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. A systematic search was executed using seven databases (PubMed, Cinahl, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Medline) on December 11, 2024. Eligible publications focused on remote monitoring of symptoms, wishes, or needs of patients with heart failure in palliative care. Of the 3820 identified studies, 23 met the inclusion criteria, of which 20 were conducted in Western countries. None of the included studies described a monitoring instrument that simultaneously evaluated symptoms, wishes, and needs. Most instruments (n = 22) focused primarily on monitoring physical symptoms and were not specifically designed for palliative care. Only one instrument monitored wishes and needs, but it did not assess symptoms. Details on implementation were often insufficient. Currently no instruments are available that monitor both symptoms as well as identify the wishes and needs of patients with heart failure who receive palliative care. The RAPHAEL project aims to fill this gap by developing an instrument for this purpose whilst assessing its implementation into practice. Open Science Framework (OSF) (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5GAFM).