J D Campbell1, K D Harris, R Hodge. 1. Department of Family and Community Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia, 65212, USA. CampbellJ@health.missouri.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The researchers investigated rural health providers' perceptions of telemedicine, developed a framework for assessing their readiness to adopt this type of technology, and offered a guide for its implementation. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected from semistructured interviews with thematic analysis. POPULATION: The study population included physicians, nurses, and administrative personnel located in 10 health care practices in 4 communities in 3 rural Missouri counties. OUTCOMES MEASURED: The researchers measured how often health providers used telemedicine technology and their perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, barriers, and facilitators involved in adopting it. RESULTS: Participants varied widely in their perceptions of telemedicine. Providers in practices affiliated with the university's tertiary center were more likely to use it than were those in private practice. Interviews and other data yielded 6 themes related to a provider's receptivity to technological change: These themes were turf, efficacy, practice context, apprehension, time to learn, and ownership. Each theme applies to the computer and videoconferencing components of telemedicine, and each may operate as a perceived barrier or facilitator of change. CONCLUSIONS: Care providers and administrators consider a range of factors, including economic ramifications, efficacy, social pressure, and apprehension, when deciding whether and how fast to adopt telemedicine. Since adopting this technology can be a major change, agencies trying to introduce it into rural areas should take all these factors into account in their approach to health care providers, staff, and communities.
OBJECTIVE: The researchers investigated rural health providers' perceptions of telemedicine, developed a framework for assessing their readiness to adopt this type of technology, and offered a guide for its implementation. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected from semistructured interviews with thematic analysis. POPULATION: The study population included physicians, nurses, and administrative personnel located in 10 health care practices in 4 communities in 3 rural Missouri counties. OUTCOMES MEASURED: The researchers measured how often health providers used telemedicine technology and their perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, barriers, and facilitators involved in adopting it. RESULTS:Participants varied widely in their perceptions of telemedicine. Providers in practices affiliated with the university's tertiary center were more likely to use it than were those in private practice. Interviews and other data yielded 6 themes related to a provider's receptivity to technological change: These themes were turf, efficacy, practice context, apprehension, time to learn, and ownership. Each theme applies to the computer and videoconferencing components of telemedicine, and each may operate as a perceived barrier or facilitator of change. CONCLUSIONS: Care providers and administrators consider a range of factors, including economic ramifications, efficacy, social pressure, and apprehension, when deciding whether and how fast to adopt telemedicine. Since adopting this technology can be a major change, agencies trying to introduce it into rural areas should take all these factors into account in their approach to health care providers, staff, and communities.
Authors: Katherine M Atkinson; Robin Ducharme; Jacqueline Westeinde; Sarah E Wilson; Shelley L Deeks; Dante Pascali; Kumanan Wilson Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2015 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Andrew Bonney; Patricia Knight-Billington; Judy Mullan; Michelle Moscova; Stephen Barnett; Don Iverson; Daniel Saffioti; Elisabeth Eastland; Michelle Guppy; Kathryn Weston; Ian Wilson; Judith Nicky Hudson; Dimity Pond; Gerard Gill; Charlotte Hespe Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2015-01-07
Authors: Agnieszka Kruszyńska-Fischbach; Sylwia Sysko-Romańczuk; Tomasz M Napiórkowski; Anna Napiórkowska; Dariusz Kozakiewicz Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Jane Zapka; Kit Simpson; Lara Hiott; Laura Langston; Samir Fakhry; Dee Ford Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-01-29 Impact factor: 2.655