Background Information and communication technology (ICT) offers considerable potential for supporting older adults in managing their health, including chronic diseases. However, there are mixed opinions about the benefits and effectiveness of ICT interventions for older adults with chronic diseases. Objective We aim to map the use of ICT interventions in health care and identified barriers to and enablers of its use among older adults with chronic disease. Methods A scoping review was conducted using 5 databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and ProQuest) to identify eligible articles from January 2000 to July 2020. Publications incorporating the use of ICT interventions, otherwise known as eHealth, such as mobile health, telehealth and telemedicine, decision support systems, electronic health records, and remote monitoring in people aged ≥55 years with chronic diseases were included. We conducted a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats framework analysis to explore the implied enablers of and barriers to the use of ICT interventions. Results Of the 1149 identified articles, 31 (2.7%; n=4185 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Of the 31 articles, 5 (16%) mentioned the use of various eHealth interventions. A range of technologies was reported, including mobile health (8/31, 26%), telehealth (7/31, 23%), electronic health record (2/31, 6%), and mixed ICT interventions (14/31, 45%). Various chronic diseases affecting older adults were identified, including congestive heart failure (9/31, 29%), diabetes (7/31, 23%), chronic respiratory disease (6/31, 19%), and mental health disorders (8/31, 26%). ICT interventions were all designed to help people self-manage chronic diseases and demonstrated positive effects. However, patient-related and health care provider–related challenges, in integrating ICT interventions in routine practice, were identified. Barriers to using ICT interventions in older adults included knowledge gaps, a lack of willingness to adopt new skills, and reluctance to use technologies. Implementation challenges related to ICT interventions such as slow internet connectivity and lack of an appropriate reimbursement policy were reported. Advantages of using ICT interventions include their nonpharmacological nature, provision of health education, encouragement for continued physical activity, and maintenance of a healthy diet. Participants reported that the use of ICT was a fun and effective way of increasing their motivation and supporting self-management tasks. It gave them reassurance and peace of mind by promoting a sense of security and reducing anxiety. Conclusions ICT interventions have the potential to support the care of older adults with chronic diseases. However, they have not been effectively integrated with routine health care. There is a need to improve awareness and education about ICT interventions among those who could benefit from them, including older adults, caregivers, and health care providers. More sustainable funding is required to promote the adoption of ICT interventions. We recommend involving clinicians and caregivers at the time of designing ICT interventions.