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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Deterrence approach on the compliance with electronic medical records privacy policy: the moderating role of computer monitoring

Authors: Kuang-Ming Kuo, Paul C. Talley, Tain-Junn Cheng

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study explored the possible antecedents that will motivate hospital employees’ compliance with privacy policy related to electronic medical records (EMR) from a deterrence perspective. Further, we also investigated the moderating effect of computer monitoring on relationships among the antecedents and the level of hospital employees’ compliance intention.

Methods

Data was collected from a large Taiwanese medical center using survey methodology. A total of 303 responses was analyzed via hierarchical regression analysis.

Results

The results revealed that sanction severity and sanction certainty significantly predict hospital employees’ compliance intention, respectively. Further, our study found external computer monitoring significantly moderates the relationship between sanction certainty and compliance intention.

Conclusions

Based on our findings, the study suggests that healthcare facilities should take proactive countermeasures, such as computer monitoring, to better protect the privacy of EMR in addition to stated privacy policy. However, the extent of computer monitoring should be kept to minimum requirements as stated by relevant regulations.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Zhou L, Soran CS, Jenter CA, Volk LA, Orav EJ, Bates DW, Simon SR. The relationship between electronic health record use and quality of care over time. J Am Med Inform Assn. 2009;16(4):457–64.CrossRef
2.
3.
Shu T, Liu H, Goss FR, Yang W, Zhou L, Bates DW, Liang M. EHR adoption across china's tertiary hospitals: a cross-sectional observational study. Int J Med Inform. 2014;83(2):113–21.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Yoshida Y, Imai T, Ohe K. The trends in EMR and CPOE adoption in Japan under the national strategy. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(10):1004–11.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Culnan MJ, Williams CC. How ethics can enhance organizational privacy: lessons from the ChoicePoint and TJX data breaches. MIS Quart. 2009;33(4):673–87.CrossRef
6.
Rothstein MA. Health privacy in the electronic age. J Legal Med. 2007;28(4):487–501.CrossRef
7.
8.
Foth M. Factors influencing the intention to comply with data protection regulations in hospitals: based on gender differences in behaviour and deterrence. Eur J Inf Syst. 2016;25(2):91–109.CrossRef
9.
10.
11.
12.
Straub DW, Welke RJ. Coping with systems risk: security planning models for management decision making. MIS Quart. 1998;22(4):441–69.CrossRef
13.
Straub DW. Effective is security: an empirical study. Inform Syst Res. 1990;1(3):255–76.CrossRef
14.
D'Arcy J, Hovav A, Galletta D. User awareness of security countermeasures and its impact on information systems misuse: a deterrence approach. Inform Syst Res. 2009;20(1):79–98.CrossRef
15.
Herath T, Rao HR. Encouraging information security behaviors in organizations: role of penalties, pressures and perceived effectiveness. Decis Supp Syst. 2009a;47(2):154–65.CrossRef
16.
Herath T, Rao HR. Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations. Eur J Inf Syst. 2009b;18(2):106–25.CrossRef
17.
Hovav A, D’Arcy J. Applying an extended model of deterrence across cultures: an investigation of information systems misuse in the U.S. and South Korea. Inform Manage. 2012;49(2):99–110.CrossRef
18.
Li H, Sarathy R, Zhang J, Luo X. Exploring the effects of organizational justice, personal ethics and sanction on internet use policy compliance. Inform Syst J. 2014;24(6):479–502.CrossRef
19.
Guo KH, Yuan Y. The effects of multilevel sanctions on information security violations: a mediating model. Inform Manage. 2012;49(6):320–6.CrossRef
20.
Ifinedo P. Understanding information systems security policy compliance: an integration of the theory of planned behavior and the protection motivation theory. Comput Secur. 2012;31(1):83–95.CrossRef
21.
Ifinedo P. Information systems security policy compliance: an empirical study of the effects of socialisation, influence, and cognition. Inform Manage. 2014;51(1):69–79.CrossRef
22.
D'Arcy J, Herath T. A review and analysis of deterrence theory in the is security literature: making sense of the disparate findings. Eur J Inf Syst. 2011;20(6):643–58.CrossRef
23.
Henseler J, Fassott G. Testing moderating effects in pls path models: An illustration of available procedures. In: Esposito Vinzi V, Chin WW, Henseler J, Wang H, editors. Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications in marketing and related fields. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 713–35.CrossRef
24.
Irwin JR, McClelland GH. Misleading heuristics and moderated multiple regression models. J Marketing Res. 2001;38(1):100–9.CrossRef
25.
Paczkowski WF, Kuruzovich J. Checking email in the bathroom: monitoring email responsiveness behavior in the workplace. Am J Manag. 2016;16(2):23–39.
26.
Sarpong S, Rees D. Assessing the effects of ‘big brother’ in a workplace: the case of wast. Eur J Manag. 2014;32(2):216–22.CrossRef
27.
Chang SE, Liu AY, Lin S. Exploring privacy and trust for employee monitoring. Ind Manage Data Syst. 2015;115(1):88–106.CrossRef
28.
Jeske D, Santuzzi AM. Monitoring what and how: psychological implications of electronic performance monitoring. New Tech Work Employ. 2015;30(1):62–78.CrossRef
29.
Spitzmüller C, Stanton JM. Examining employee compliance with organizational surveillance and monitoring. J Occup Organ Psych. 2006;79(2):245–72.CrossRef
30.
Pratt TC, Cullen FT, Blevins KR, Daigle LE, Madensen TD. The empirical status of deterrence theory: A meta-analysis. In: Cullen FT, Wright JP, Blevins KR, editors. Taking stock: The status of criminological theory. New Bronswick, NJ: Transaction Publisher; 2006. p. 367–96.
31.
Gibbs JP. Crime, punishment, and deterrence. Southwest Soc Sci Q. 1968;48(2):515–30.
32.
Tittle CR. Crime rates and legal sanctions. Soc Probl. 1969;16(4):409–23.CrossRef
33.
Onwudiwe I, Odo J, Onyeozili E. Deterrence theory. In: Bosworth M, editor. Encyclopedia of prisons & correctional facilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 2005. p. 234–8.
34.
Gopal RD, Sanders GL. Preventive and deterrent controls for software piracy. J Manage Inform Syst. 1997;13(4):29–48.CrossRef
35.
Al-Omari A, El-Gayar O, Deokar A. Security policy compliance: user acceptance perspective. In: 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on system science (HICSS): 4–7 January, 2012 2012; Maui. HI: IEEE; 2012. p. 3317–26.CrossRef
36.
Pahnila S, Siponen M, Mahmood A: Employees' behavior towards is security policy compliance. In: System Sciences, 2007 HICSS 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on: 3–6 January 2007 2007; Big Island, Hawaii; 2007: 156b-156b.
37.
Hu Q, Xu Z, Dinev T, Ling H. Does deterrence work in reducing information security policy abuse by employees? Comm Acm. 2011;54(6):54–60.CrossRef
38.
Siponen M, Pahnila S, Mahmood MA. Compliance with information security policies: an empirical investigation. Comput. 2010;43(2):64–71.CrossRef
39.
D’Arcy J, Hovav A. Does one size fit all? Examining the differential effects of is security countermeasures. J Bus Ethics. 2009;89(1):59–71.CrossRef
40.
Straub DW, Nance WD. Discovering and disciplining computer abuse in organizations - a field-study. MIS Quart. 1990;14(1):45–60.CrossRef
41.
Li H, Zhang J, Sarathy R. Understanding compliance with internet use policy from the perspective of rational choice theory. Decis Supp Syst. 2010;48(4):635–45.CrossRef
42.
Kankanhalli A, Teo HH, Tan BCY, Wei KK. An integrative study of information systems security effectiveness. Int J Inform Manage. 2003;23(2):139–54.CrossRef
43.
Lee SM, Lee SG, Yoo S. An integrative model of computer abuse based on social control and general deterrence theories. Inform Manage. 2004;41(6):707–18.CrossRef
44.
Yang CG, Lee HJ. A study on the antecedents of healthcare information protection intention. Inform Syst Front. 2016;18(2):253–63.CrossRef
45.
Peace AG, Galletta AG, Thong JYL. Software piracy in the workplace: a model and empirical test. J Manage Inform Syst. 2003;20(1):153–77.CrossRef
46.
Siponen M, Vance A. Neutralization: new insights into the problem of employee systems security policy violations. MIS Quart. 2010;34(3):487–502.CrossRef
47.
Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Xu X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quart. 2012;36(1):157–78.CrossRef
48.
Brislin RW. Comparative research methodology: cross-cultural studies. Int J Psychol. 1976;11(3):215–29.CrossRef
49.
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis: Pearson new international edition. Seventh ed. Pearson Education Limited: Essex, United Kingdom; 2014.
50.
Dawson JF. Moderation in management research: what, why, when, and how. J Bus Psychol. 2014;29(1):1–19.CrossRef
51.
Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2013.
52.
McCole P, Ramsey E, Williams J: Trust considerations on attitudes towards online purchasing: The moderating effect of privacy and security concerns 2010, 63(9–10):1018–1024.
53.
Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1991.
54.
Russ FA, McNeilly KM. Links among satisfaction, commitment, and turnover intentions: the moderating effect of experience, gender, and performance. J Bus Res. 1995;34(1):57–65.CrossRef
55.
Arnold HJ. Moderator variables: a clarification of conceptual, analytic, and psychometric issues. Organ Behav Hum Perf. 1982;29(2):143–74.CrossRef
56.
Xue Y, Liang H, Wu L. Punishment, justice, and compliance in mandatory it settings. Inform Syst Res. 2011;22(2):400–14.CrossRef
57.
Guo KH, Yuan Y, Archer NP, Connelly CE. Understanding nonmalicious security violations in the workplace: a composite behavior model. J Manage Inform Syst. 2011;28(2):203–36.CrossRef
58.
Son JY. Out of fear or desire? Toward a better understanding of employees’ motivation to follow is security policies. Inform Manage. 2011;48(7):296–302.CrossRef
59.
D'Arcy J, Devaraj S. Employee misuse of information technology resources: testing a contemporary deterrence model. Decis Sci. 2012;43(6):1091–124.CrossRef
60.
Chen Y, Ramamurthy K, Wen KW. Organizations' information security policy compliance: stick or carrot approach? J Manage Inform Syst. 2012;29(3):157–88.CrossRef
61.
Cheng L, Li Y, Li W, Holm E, Zhai Q. Understanding the violation of is security policy in organizations: An integrated model based on social control and deterrence theory. Comput Secur. 2013;39(Part B):447–59.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Deterrence approach on the compliance with electronic medical records privacy policy: the moderating role of computer monitoring
Authors
Kuang-Ming Kuo
Paul C. Talley
Tain-Junn Cheng
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0957-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research article

Field study of a web service for stimulating the positive side of stress: entrepreneurs’ experiences and design implications

Research article

Patient decision aids: a content analysis based on a decision tree structure

Research article

How should electronic health records be designed? A cross-sectional study in patients with psoriasis

Research article

How to improve eRehabilitation programs in stroke care? A focus group study to identify requirements of end-users

Research article

Frequency of ubiquitous connectivity and associated factors among Mexican adolescents

Research article

Characteristics of older adults using patient web portals to view their DXA results