Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Exploring critical factors influencing physicians’ acceptance of mobile electronic medical records based on the dual-factor model: a validation in Taiwan

Authors: Chung-Feng Liu, Tain-Junn Cheng

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

With respect to information management, most of the previous studies on the acceptance of healthcare information technologies were analyzed from “positive” perspectives. However, such acceptance is always influenced by both positive and negative factors and it is necessary to validate both in order to get a complete understanding. This study aims to explore physicians’ acceptance of mobile electronic medical records based on the dual-factor model, which is comprised of inhibitors and enablers, to explain an individual’s technology usage. Following an earlier healthcare study in the USA, the researchers conducted a similar survey for an Eastern country (Taiwan) to validate whether perceived threat to professional autonomy acts as a critical inhibitor. In addition, perceived mobility, which is regarded as a critical feature of mobile services, was also evaluated as a common antecedent variable in the model.

Methods

Physicians from three branch hospitals of a medical group were invited to participate and complete questionnaires. Partial least squares, a structural equation modeling technique, was used to evaluate the proposed model for explanatory power and hypotheses testing.

Results

158 valid questionnaires were collected, yielding a response rate of 33.40%. As expected, the inhibitor of perceived threat has a significant impact on the physicians’ perceptions of usefulness as well as their intention to use. The enablers of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness were also significant. In addition, as expected, perceived mobility was confirmed to have a significant impact on perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and perceived threat.

Conclusions

It was confirmed that the dual-factor model is a comprehensive method for exploring the acceptance of healthcare information technologies, both in Western and Eastern countries. Furthermore, perceived mobility was proven to be an effective antecedent variable in the model. The researchers believe that the results of this study will contribute to the research on the acceptance of healthcare information technologies, particularly with regards to mobile electronic medical records, based on the dual-factor viewpoints of academia and practice.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Ludwicke DA, Doucette J: Adopting electronic medical records in primary care: Lessons learned from health information systems implementation experience in seven countries.Int J Med Inform 2009, 78:22–31.CrossRef
3.
Kaplan B: The medical computing “lag”: Perceptions of barriers to the application of computers to medicine.Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1987, 3:123–136.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Paré G, Sicotte C, Jacques H: The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians’acceptance of clinical information systems.J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006, 13:197–205.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models.Manage Sci 1989, 35:982–1003.CrossRef
6.
Ang J, Pavri F: A survey and critique of the impacts of information technology.Int J Inform Manage 1994, 14:122–133.CrossRef
7.
8.
Frideres JS, Goldenberg S, Disanto J, Fleming U: Technophobia: incidence and potential causal factors.Soc Indic Res 1983, 13:381–393.CrossRef
9.
Hu PJ, Chau PYK, Sheng ORL, Tam KY: Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology.J Manage Inform Syst 1999, 16:91–112.CrossRef
10.
Kuo KM, Liu CF, Ma CC: An investigation of the effect of nurses’ technology readiness on the acceptance of mobile electronic medical record systems.BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013, 13:88.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Asua J, Orruño E, Reviriego E, Gagnon M: Healthcare professional acceptance of telemonitoring for chronic care patients in primary care.BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012, 12:139.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Zhang HP, Cocosila MP, Archer NP: Factors of Adoption of Mobile Information Technology by Homecare Nurses: A Technology Acceptance Model 2 Approach.Comput Inform Nurs 2010, 28:49–56.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Aggelidis VP, Chatzoglou PD: Using a modified technology acceptance model in hospitals.Int J Med Inform 2009, 78:115–126.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Chang HC, Liu CF, Hwang HG: Exploring Nursing e-Learning Systems Success Based on Information System Success Model.Comput Inform Nurs 2011, 29:741–747.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Walter Z, Lopez MS: Physician acceptance of information technologies: Role of perceived threat to professional autonomy.Decis Support Syst 2008, 46:206–215. 68.CrossRef
16.
17.
18.
Källander K, Tibenderana JK, Akpogheneta OJ, Strachan DL, Hill Z, ten Asbroek AH, Conteh L, Kirkwood BR, Meek SR: Mobile Health (mHealth) Approaches and Lessons for Increased Performance and Retention of Community Health Workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Review.J Med Internet Res 2013, 15:e17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
CPRI Work Group on CPR Description: Computer-based Patient Record Description of Content. Schaumburg, IL: Computer-based Patient Record Institute; 1996.
20.
Institute of Medicine: The Computer-Based Patient Record: An Essential Technology for Health Care. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1997.
21.
Department of Health and Human Services: The National Alliance for Health Information Technology report to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology on defining key health information technology terms. 2008.
22.
Ying A: Mobile Physician Order Entry.J Healthc Inf Manag 2003, 17:58–63.PubMed
23.
Bielli E, Carminati F, La Capra S, Lina M, Brunelli C, Tamburini M: A Wireless Health Outcomes Monitoring System (WHOMS): development and field testing with cancer patients using mobile phones.BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2004, 4:7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Wu RC, Orr MS, Chignell M, Straus SE: Usability of a mobile electronic medical record prototype: a verbal protocol analysis.Inform Health Soc Care 2008, 33:139–149.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hsieh SH, Hou IC, Cheng PH, Tan CT, Shen PC, Hsu KP, Hsieh SL, Lai F: Design and implementation of web-based mobile electronic medication administration record.J Med Syst 2010, 34:947–958.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Hsu SC, Liu CF, Weng RH, Chen CJ: Factors influencing nurses’ intentions toward the use of mobile electronic medical records.Comput Inform Nurs 2013, 31:124–132.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Venkatesh V, Davis FD: A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies.Manage Sci 2000, 46(2):186–204.CrossRef
28.
Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD: User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view.MIS Quart 2003, 27:425–478.
29.
Venkatesh V, Bala H: Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions.Decision Sci 2008, 39:273–315.CrossRef
30.
DeLone WH, McLean ER: Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable.Inform Syst Res 1992, 3:60–95.CrossRef
31.
Delone WH, McLean ER: The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: a ten-year update.J Manage Inform Syst 2003, 19:9–30.
32.
Cenfetelli RT: Inhibitors and enablers as dual factor concepts in technology usage.J Assoc Inf Syst 2004, 5:472–492.
33.
Lee Y, Kozar KA, Larsen KRT: The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future.Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2003, 12:752–780.
34.
Fishbein M, Ajzen I: Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
35.
Ajzen I: From intention to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Edited by Kuhl J, Bechmann J. Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany: Springer; 1985.
36.
Szajna B: Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model.Manage Sci 1996, 42:85–92.CrossRef
37.
Holden RJ, Karsh BT: The Technology Acceptance Model: its past and its future in health care.J Biomed Inform 2010, 43:159–172.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Harvey JD: Towards a user-friendly future. The impact of information technology within primary health care.Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1989, 5:79–89.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Dowswell G, Harrison S, Wright J: Clinical guidelines: attitudes, information processes and culture in English primary care.Int J Health Plan M 2001, 16:107–124.CrossRef
40.
Hayward RSA, Moore KA: Canadian physicians’ attitudes about and preferences regarding clinical practice guidelines.Can Med Assoc J 1997, 156:1715–1723.
41.
Lowenhaupt M: Removing barriers to technology.Physician Exec 2004, 30:12–14.PubMed
42.
Kim J, Park HA: Development of a health information technology acceptance model using consumers’ health behavior intention.J Med Internet Res 2012, 14:e133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Zhou T: Examining mobile banking user adoption from the perspectives of trust and flow experience.Inf Technol Manag 2012, 13:27–37.CrossRef
44.
Mallat N, Rossi M, Tuunainen VK, Öörni A: The impact of use context on mobile services acceptance: the case of mobile ticketing.Inform Manage 2009, 46:190–195.CrossRef
45.
Huang JH, Lin YR, Chuang ST: Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model.Electron Libr 2007, 25:585–598.CrossRef
46.
Schierz PG, Schilke O, Wirtz BW: Understanding consumer acceptance of mobile payment services: an empirical analysis.Electron Commer R A 2010, 9:209–216.CrossRef
47.
Park E, Ohm J: Factors influencing users’ employment of mobile map services.Telematics and Informatics 2014, 31:253–265.CrossRef
48.
Park E, Baek S, Ohm J, Chang HJ: Determinants of player acceptance of mobile social network games: An application of extended technology acceptance model.Telematics and Informatics 2014, 31:3–15.CrossRef
49.
Park E, del Pobil AP: Extending the technology acceptance model in remote pointing technology: identifying the role of perceived mobility and control.Sensor Rev 2013, 33:40–47.CrossRef
50.
Park E, del Pobil AP: Technology acceptance model for the use of tablet PCs.Wireless Pers Commun 2013, 73:1561–1572.CrossRef
51.
52.
Davis FD: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.MIS Quart 1989, 13:319–340.CrossRef
53.
Lee T: The impact of perceptions of interactivity on customer trust and transaction intentions in mobile commerce.J Electron Commer Res 2005, 6:165–180.
54.
Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR: The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing.Adv Int Market 2009, 20:277–319.
55.
Fornell C, Larcker DF: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error.J Marketing Res 1981, 18:39–50.CrossRef
56.
Chin WW: How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Handbook of Partial Least Squares Concepts, Methods and Applications. 1st edition. Edited by Vinzi VE, Chin WW, Henseler J, Wang H. Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2010.
57.
O’Leary-Kelly SW, Vokurka RJ: The empirical assessment of construct validity.J Oper Manag 1998, 16:387–405.CrossRef
58.
Wetzels M, Schroder GO, Oppen VC: Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration.MIS Quart 2009, 33:177–195.
59.
60.
Pellegrino ED: Patient and physician autonomy: conflicting rights and obligations in the physician-patient relationship.J Contemp Health Law Policy 1994, 10:47–68.PubMed
61.
Williams GC, McGregor HA, King D, Nelson CC, Glasgow RE: Variation in perceived competence, glycemic control, and patient satisfaction: relationship to autonomy support from physicians.Patient Educ Couns 2005, 57:39–45.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Featherman MS, Pavlou PA: Predicting e-services adoption: a perceived risk facets perspective.Int J Hum-Comput 2003, 59:451–474.CrossRef
63.
Mallat N, Rossi M, Tuunainen VK, Öörni A: An empirical investigation of mobile ticketing service adoption in public transportation.Pers Ubiquitous Comput 2008, 12:57–65.CrossRef
64.
World Health Organization: mHealth: New Horizons for Health Through Mobile Technologies. Geneva: WHO; 2011.
Metadata
Title
Exploring critical factors influencing physicians’ acceptance of mobile electronic medical records based on the dual-factor model: a validation in Taiwan
Authors
Chung-Feng Liu
Tain-Junn Cheng
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-014-0125-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Knowledge and attitudes of doctors towards e-health use in healthcare delivery in government and private hospitals in Northern Uganda: a cross-sectional study

Research article

How to model temporal changes in comorbidity for cancer patients using prospective cohort data

Research article

Cultural adaptation of a shared decision making tool with Aboriginal women: a qualitative study

Research article

User interface design for mobile-based sexual health interventions for young people: Design recommendations from a qualitative study on an online Chlamydia clinical care pathway

Research Article

Fine-grained information extraction from German transthoracic echocardiography reports

Research article

Translation and psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Leeds Attitudes to Concordance II scale