Users’ attitudes towards personal health recordsA cross-sectional pilot studyWe wish to thank all the patients and clinicians who participated in the study and the staff of the Sherwood Park Primary Care Network. This project was funded in part by a research collaboration grant with TELUS Healthcare. Additional funding was provided by the MITACS accelerate program.
06 January 2016
accepted: 11 April 2016
16 December 2017 (online)
Prevention and management of chronic conditions is a priority for many healthcare systems. Personal health records have been suggested to facilitate implementation of chronic care programs. However, patients’ attitude towards personal health records (PHRs) can significantly affect the adoption rates and use of PHRs.
to evaluate the attitude of patients with Type II diabetes towards using a PHR to manage their condition.
We used a cross-sectional exploratory pilot study. Fifty-four (54) patients used a PHR to monitor and record their blood glucose levels, diet, and activities for 30 days, and to communicate with their clinicians. At the end of the study, patients responded to a survey based on three constructs borrowed from different technology acceptance frameworks: relative advantage, job fit, and perceived usefulness. A multivariate predictive model was formed using partial least squaring technique (PLS) and the effect of each construct on the patients’ attitude towards system use was evaluated. Patients also participated in a semi-structured interview.
We found a significant positive correlation between job fit and attitude (JF → ATT = +0.318, p<0.01). There was no statistical evidence of any moderating or mediating effect of other main constructs or any of the confounding factors (i.e., age, gender, time after diagnosed) on attitude.
The attitude of patients towards using PHR in management of their diabetes was positive. Their attitude was mainly influenced by the extent to which the system helped them better perform activities and self-manage their condition.
- 1 Ant AOzok, Wu H, Garrido M, Pronovost PJ, Gurses AP. Usability and perceived usefulness of Personal Health Records for preventive health care: a case study focusing on patients’ and primary care providers’ perspectives. Appl Ergon 2014; 45 (03) 613-628.
- 2 Markle Foundation. Connecting Americans to their Health Care Final Report. 2004
- 3 Tang PC, Ash JS, Bates DW, Overhage JM, Sands DZ. Personal health records: definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association JAMIA 2006; 13 (02) 121-126.
- 4 Logue MD, Effken JA. An exploratory study of the personal health records adoption model in the older adult with chronic illness. Informatics in primary care 2012; 20 (03) 151-169.
- 5 Kahn JS, Aulakh V, Bosworth A. What it takes: characteristics of the ideal personal health record. Health affairs (Project Hope) 2009; 28 (02) 369-376.
- 6 Canadian Diabetes Association. The cost of diabetes in Alberta. 2009 [cited 2015 July, 07]; Available from: http://www.diabetes.ca/documents/get-involved/diabetes-in-alberta.pdf
- 7 Logue MD, Effken JA. Modeling factors that influence personal health records adoption. Computers, informatics, nursing CIN 2012; 30 (07) 354-362.
- 8 Angst CM, Agarwal R. Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: the elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion. MIS Quarterly 2009; 33 (02) 339-370.
- 9 Andrews L, Gajanayake R, Sahama T. The Australian general public’s perceptions of having a personally controlled electronic health record (PCEHR). Int J Med Inform 2014; 83 (12) 889-900.
- 10 Butler JM, Carter M, Hayden C, Gibson B, Weir C, Snow L, Morales J, Smith A, Bateman K, Gundlapalli AV, Samore M. Understanding adoption of a personal health record in rural health care clinics: revealing barriers and facilitators of adoption including attributions about potential patient portal users and self-reported characteristics of early adopting users. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2013; 16: 152-161.
- 11 Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introductionto Theory and Research. MA: Addison-Wesle; 1975
- 12 Davis FD. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 1989; 13 (03) 319-340.
- 13 Venkatesh V, Morris GM, Davis GB, Davis DF. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly 2003; 27 (03) 425-478.
- 14 Thompson RL, Higgins CA, Howell JM. Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization. MIS Quarterly 1991; 15 (01) 125-143.
- 15 Teddlie C, Yu F. Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology with Examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 2007; 01 (01) 77-100.
- 16 Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2012. Diabetes Care 2012; 35 (Suppl. 01) S11-S63.
- 17 Chin W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation. In: GA M. editor. Modern methods for business research. Mahwah (NJ): Taylor & Francis; 1998: 295-336.
- 18 Ringle CM, Wende Sven, Becker Jan-Michael. Smartpls 3. Hamburg: SmartPLS; 2014. [cited 2015 July 07]; Available from: http://www.smartpls.com
- 19 Hair HMFJ, Ringle MCh, Sarstedt M. A primer on partial least sqares structural equation modeling (PLSSEM). Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE; 2014
- 20 Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J. Qualitative data analysis : a methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, Califorinia: SAGE Publications, Inc; Edition 3. 2014
- 21 Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to practice. Second ed. New Jersy Prince Hall; 2000
- 22 Logue MD, Effken JA. Validating the personal health records adoption model using a modified e-Delphi. Journal of advanced nursing 2013; 69 (03) 685-696.
- 23 Archer N, Fevrier-Thomas U, Lokker C, McKibbon KA, Straus SE. Personal health records: a scoping review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA 2011; 18 (04) 515-522.
- 24 Bickmore TW, Caruso L, Clough-Gorr K. Acceptance and usability of a relational agent interface by urban older adults. CHI ’05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Portland, OR, USA: 1056879: ACM; 2005: 1212-1215.
- 25 Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1991; 50 (02) 179-211.