Dataset Information

Factors affecting physicians using mobile health applications: an empirical study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mobile health applications (mHealth apps) have created innovative service channels for patients with chronic diseases. These innovative service channels require physicians to actively use mHealth apps. However, few studies investigate physicians' participation in mHealth apps.

Objective

This study aims to empirically explore factors affecting physicians' usage behaviors of mHealth apps. Based on the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2) and mHealth apps features, we propose a research model including altruism, cognitive trust, and online ratings.

Methods

We collected data from physicians who have used mHealth apps and conducted a factor analysis to verify the convergence and discriminative effects. We used a hierarchical regression method to test the path coefficients and statistical significance of our research model. In addition, we adopted bootstrapping approach and further analyzed the mediating effects of behavioral intention between all antecedent variables and physicians' usage behavior. Finally, we conducted three robustness analyses to test the validity of results and tested the constructs to verify the common method bias.

Results

Our results support the effects of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and altruism on the behavioral intentions of physicians using mHealth apps. Moreover, facilitating conditions and habits positively affect physicians using mHealth apps through the mediating effort of behavioral intention. Physicians' cognitive trust and online rating have significant effects on their usage behaviors through the mediating efforts of behavioral intention.

Conclusions

This study contributes to the existing literature on UTAUT2 extension of physicians' acceptance of mHealth apps by adding altruism, cognitive trust, and online ratings. The results of this study provide a novel perspective in understanding the factors affecting physicians' usage behaviors on mHealth apps in China and provide such apps' managers with an insight into the promotion of physicians' active acceptance and usage behaviors.

SUBMITTER: Wu P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8729011 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveAs a new medical service mode, the value of mobile health (mHealth） services has received increasing attention and recognition. However, compared with the owners of mobile devices, the user scale of mHealth services is still small. It is well known that doctors' recommendations have an important impact on what kind of medical service patients choose. To explore the key factors affecting doctors' recommendation of mHealth services to patients, and to provide countermeasures for mHealth service providers and hospital managers, so as to promote doctors to recommend mHealth services to more patients.MethodsThrough literature review, expert consultation and pre-test, a questionnaire including 22 questions was designed, and 114 valid questionnaires were collected by online research. Net Promoter Score (NPS) was used to evaluate doctors' recommendation willingness, and multivariate logistics analysis was used to evaluate the key factors affecting doctors' recommendation willingness.ResultsThe NPS of doctors was 6.06%, among which the recommenders, neutrals and critics accounted for 29.56%, 46.96% and 23.48%, respectively. The attitude towards mHealth services and whether they pay attention to and/or are willing to try new technologies are the key factors affecting the doctors' recommendation, and the usefulness for patients most often emphasized by mHealth service providers to doctors does not affect doctors' recommendation willingness. In addition, whether mHealth services can help doctors establish personal brands may be a potential factor to enhance doctors' recommendation willingness.ConclusionIn order to improve the recommendation willingness of doctors, mHealth service providers and hospital managers should focus on doctors who have a positive attitude towards mHealth services and are highly innovative (which often means younger and lower professional levels). At the same time, they should think about how to use mHealth services to help doctors establish personal brands in the future.

Project description:BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) tools have emerged as a promising health care technology that may contribute to cost savings, better access to care, and enhanced clinical outcomes; however, it is important to ensure their acceptance and adoption to harness this potential. Patient adoption has been recognized as a key challenge that requires further exploration.ObjectiveThe aim of this review was to systematically investigate the literature to understand the factors affecting patients' adoption of mHealth tools by considering sociotechnical factors (from technical, social, and health perspectives).MethodsA structured search was completed following the participants, intervention, comparators, and outcomes framework. We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and SAGE databases for studies published between January 2011 and July 2021 in the English language, yielding 5873 results, of which 147 studies met the inclusion criteria. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook were followed to ensure a systematic process. Extracted data were analyzed using NVivo (QSR International), with thematic analysis and narrative synthesis of emergent themes.ResultsThe technical factors affecting patients' adoption of mHealth tools were categorized into six key themes, which in turn were divided into 20 subthemes: usefulness, ease of use, data-related, monetary factors, technical issues, and user experience. Health-related factors were categorized into six key themes: the disease or health condition, the care team's role, health consciousness and literacy, health behavior, relation to other therapies, integration into patient journey, and the patients' insurance status. Social and personal factors were divided into three key clusters: demographic factors, personal characteristics, and social and cultural aspects; these were divided into 19 subthemes, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when addressing potential barriers to mHealth adoption and how to overcome them.ConclusionsThis review builds on the growing body of research that investigates patients' adoption of mHealth services and highlights the complexity of the factors affecting adoption, including personal, social, technical, organizational, and health care aspects. We recommend a more patient-centered approach by ensuring the tools' fit into the overall patient journey and treatment plan, emphasizing inclusive design, and warranting comprehensive patient education and support. Moreover, empowering and mobilizing clinicians and care teams, addressing ethical data management issues, and focusing on health care policies may facilitate adoption.

Project description:BackgroundIn the recent decades, the number of apps promoting health behaviors and health-related strategies and interventions has increased alongside the number of smartphone users. Nevertheless, the validity process for measuring and reporting app quality remains unsatisfactory for health professionals and end users and represents a public health concern. The Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) is a tool validated and widely used in the scientific literature to evaluate and compare mHealth app functionalities. However, MARS is not adapted to the French culture nor to the language.ObjectiveThis study aims to translate, adapt, and validate the equivalent French version of MARS (ie, MARS-F).MethodsThe original MARS was first translated to French by two independent bilingual scientists, and their common version was blind back-translated twice by two native English speakers, culminating in a final well-established MARS-F. Its comprehensibility was then evaluated by 6 individuals (3 researchers and 3 nonacademics), and the final MARS-F version was created. Two bilingual raters independently completed the evaluation of 63 apps using MARS and MARS-F. Interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. In addition, internal consistency and validity of both scales were assessed. Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate the scalability of both MARS and MARS-F.ResultsMARS-F had a good alignment with the original MARS, with properties comparable between the two scales. The correlation coefficients (r) between the corresponding dimensions of MARS and MARS-F ranged from 0.97 to 0.99. The internal consistencies of the MARS-F dimensions engagement (ω=0.79), functionality (ω=0.79), esthetics (ω=0.78), and information quality (ω=0.61) were acceptable and that for the overall MARS score (ω=0.86) was good. Mokken scale analysis revealed a strong scalability for MARS (Loevinger H=0.37) and a good scalability for MARS-F (H=0.35).ConclusionsMARS-F is a valid tool, and it would serve as a crucial aid for researchers, health care professionals, public health authorities, and interested third parties, to assess the quality of mHealth apps in French-speaking countries.