| Literature DB >> 25293651 |
Francesc Saigí-Rubió, Joan Torrent-Sellens, Ana Jiménez-Zarco.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study presented in this article is to analyse the determinants of telemedicine use. To that end, the study makes two basic contributions. First, it considers six working hypotheses in the context of technology acceptance models (TAMs). Second, it uses data obtained for three samples of physicians from three different countries (Spain, Colombia and Bolivia). Obtaining and comparing evidence on an international scale allows determinants of telemedicine use to be evaluated across different contexts.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25293651 PMCID: PMC4195871 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-014-0128-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Implement Sci ISSN: 1748-5908 Impact factor: 7.327
Figure 1Drivers of telemedicine use model.
Described information for the data collection conducted in Spain, Colombia and Bolivia
| Spain | Colombia | Bolivia | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sampling universe | 356 physicians from hospitals, health care services and research centres of the Canary Islands Health Service | 184 physicians affiliated to the Society of Surgery Service, San José Hospital of Bogotá | 350 physicians from hospitals and health care centres in Sucre |
| Sample | 113 | 118 | 279 |
| Interview | Self-administered questionnaire | Self-administered questionnaire | Self-administered questionnaire |
| Margin of error | 7.6% | 5.4% | 2.7% |
| Fieldwork | January to June 2012 | February to April 2012 | August to September 2011 |
Study variables
| Variable | Definition | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Telemedicine use | ICT use for diagnosing, monitoring and treating patients in situations where those involved are separated by place and/or time [ | Dichotomous variable. 0 = no; 1 = yes. The variable is additive and considers ICT use for the purposes of contacting national and international professionals of exchanging valid information for diagnosing, monitoring and treating patients and of disseminating research activities with the aim of improving people's health |
| Ease-of-use of ICTs in clinical practice | Degree to which the physician considers that using ICTs in clinical practice means that less efforts will be required to perform his or her tasks | Categorical variable. 1 = perceived ease-of-use is nil; 2 = very low; 3 = low; 4 = average; 5 = quite high; 6 = high; 7 = very high |
| Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Degree to which the physician believes that using ICTs in clinical practice improves his or her performance in an activity in the short-term | Metric variable obtained from exploratory factor analysis. The original variables included in the analysis are measured on a 5-point Likert scale. The variables making up the factor are those indicating how the physician perceives that using ICTs enables errors to be controlled when performing an activity or a patient's evolution to be monitored |
| Optimism | Degree to which the physician considers that using ICTs in clinical practice will enable him or her to obtain benefits or reduce effort in the future | Metric variable obtained from exploratory factor analysis. The original variables included in the analysis are measured on a 5-point Likert scale. The variables making up the factor are those indicating how the physician perceives that using ICTs enables relationships with patients to be improved and better treatments to be recommended |
| Propensity to innovate | The individual's propensity to innovate in his or her day-to-day work using ICTs | Categorical variable. 5 = the individual totally agrees; 1 = totally disagrees |
| Level of ICT use | Degree to which the physician uses ICTs outside work | Dichotomous variable. 0 = his or her ICT use is low; 1 = high |
Main factor analysis results
| Spain | Colombia | Bolivia | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Optimism | Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Optimism | Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Optimism | |
| Variables | ||||||
| Looking up medical or health-related information on the Internet improves the doctor-patient relationship | 0.577 | 0.852 | 0.680 | |||
| Looking up medical or health-related information on the Internet leads to doubts about the health care professional's knowledge | 0.747 | 0.809 | 0.705 | |||
| Looking up medical or health-related information on the Internet improves knowledge of the patient and facilitates his or her treatment | 0.765 | 0.809 | 0.735 | |||
| The existence of computerised data allows the evolution of the patient's clinical status to be viewed | 0.946 | 0.772 | 0.788 | |||
| I am in favour of creating a single computerised medical history for each patient, which can be accessed by any health care professional regardless of the centre where the patient is attended | 0.943 | 0.785 | 0.844 | |||
| With excessive ICT use, there is greater control of errors | 0.862 | 0.639 | 0.783 | |||
| In most cases, computerisation and ICT use in the field of health care minimise bureaucracy and have a major impact on improved clinical practice | 0.703 | 0.770 | 0.605 | |||
| % variance explained | 0.57788 | 0.15195 | 0.15521 | 0.47019 | 0.42973 | 0.14720 |
| Eigenvalue | 4.0451 | 1.06362 | 1.08644 | 3.29133 | 3.00810 | 1.03041 |
| Cronbach's alpha | 0.811 | 0.874 | 0.891 | 0.877 | ||
| Correlation matrix | Correlated variables, values higher than 0.5 | Correlated variables, values higher than 0.5 | Correlated variables, values higher than 0.5 | |||
| Determinant of the matrix | 0.001992139587910 | 0.156882043355530 | 0.318942324331276 | |||
| KMO index | 0.90176 | 0.88039 | 0.73541 | |||
| Bartlett's statistic | 645.7*** | 410.8 *** | 514.1*** | |||
| Measurement of sample adequacy | Coefficients between 0.62 and 0.80 | Coefficients between 0.62 and 0.80 | Coefficients between 0.62 and 0.80 | |||
| Component correlation matrix | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 1 | 1.000 | 0.646 | 1.000 | 0.525 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| 2 | 0.646 | 1.000 | 0.525 | 1.000 | 0.400 | 1.000 |
***Significant at 99% confidence level.
Figure 2Sedimentation graph of the Spanish sample.
Figure 3Sedimentation graph of the Colombian sample.
Figure 4Sedimentation graph of the Bolivian sample.
Descriptive analysis of the physicians' characteristics
| Spain | Colombia | Bolivia | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 67.3 | 60.2 | 40.5 |
| Female | 32.7 | 39.8 | 59.5 | |
| Age | <40 years | 14.2 | 59.0 | 50.6 |
| 40–50 years | 30.1 | 27.3 | 33.3 | |
| 50–60 years | 46.0 | 8.6 | 12.9 | |
| >60 years | 9.7 | 5.1 | 3.2 | |
| Workplace | Health care centre's central services | 8.3 | ||
| Research centre University | 0.9 | 23.7 | ||
| Tertiary care hospital | 46.9 | 37.3 | 13.3 | |
| Secondary care hospital | 8.0 | 13.7 | 56.6 | |
| Health care centre | 35.8 | 31.3 | 30.1 | |
| Occupation | Administrative post | 18.5 | 26.2 | 8.9 |
| Non-administrative post | 81.4 | 73.7 | 91.0 | |
Descriptive statistics (ANOVA analysis)
| Descriptive statistics | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender |
| Mean | Standard deviation |
| Age |
| Mean | Standard deviation |
| Post |
| Mean | Standard deviation |
| |
| Spain | |||||||||||||||
| Optimism | Female | 37 | −0.0535 | 1.11965 | - | <45 | 33 | 0.0526 | 1.04442 | - | No responsibility | 92 | 0.0516 | 0.97009 | NS |
| Male | 76 | 0.0279 | 0.94657 | >45 | 80 | −0.0212 | 0.99450 | Responsibility | 21 | −0.2270 | 1.14416 | ||||
| Total | 113 | 0.0000 | 1.00471 | Total | 113 | 0.0000 | 1.00471 | Total | 113 | 0.0000 | 1.00471 | ||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 37 | 0.0306 | 1.02422 | ** | <45 | 33 | 0.1881 | 0.82224 | - | No responsibility | 92 | 0.0786 | 0.95412 | * |
| Male | 76 | −0.0161 | 0.95961 | >45 | 80 | −0.0758 | 1.06505 | Responsibility | 21 | 0.3463 | 1.16729 | ||||
| Total | 113 | −0.0001 | 1.00481 | Total | 113 | −0.0001 | 1.00481 | Total | 113 | −0.0001 | 1.00481 | ||||
| Ease-of-use of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 37 | 4.4054 | 0.55073 |
| <45 | 33 | 4.3636 | 0.82228 | - | No responsibility | 92 | 4.4130 | 0.68182 | NS |
| Male | 76 | 4.4605 | 0.70125 | >45 | 80 | 4.4750 | 0.57313 | Responsibility | 21 | 4.5714 | 0.50709 | ||||
| Total | 113 | 4.4425 | 0.65381 | Total | 113 | 4.4425 | 0.65381 | Total | 113 | 4.4425 | 0.65381 | ||||
| Propensity to innovate | Female | 37 | 4.49 | 0.559 |
| <45 | 33 | 4.18 | 0.635 | * | No responsibility | 92 | 4.33 | 0.681 | NS |
| Male | 76 | 4.30 | 0.731 | >45 | 80 | 4.44 | 0.691 | Responsibility | 21 | 4.52 | 0.680 | ||||
| Total | 113 | 4.36 | 0.682 | Total | 113 | 4.36 | 0.682 | Total | 113 | 4.36 | 0.682 | ||||
| Telemedicine use | Female | 37 | 0.4054 | 0.49774 |
| <45 | 33 | 0.4242 | 0.50189 | - | No responsibility | 92 | 0.5109 | 0.50262 | NS |
| Male | 76 | 0.6053 | 0.49204 | >45 | 80 | 0.5875 | 0.49539 | Responsibility | 21 | 0.6667 | 0.48305 | ||||
| Total | 113 | 0.5398 | 0.50063 | Total | 113 | 0.5398 | 0.50063 | Total | 113 | 0.5398 | 0.50063 | ||||
| Level of ICT use | Female | 37 | 0.7568 | 0.43496 |
| <45 | 33 | 0.8485 | 0.36411 | - | No responsibility | 92 | 0.8370 | 0.37143 | NS |
| Male | 76 | 0.9079 | 0.29110 | >45 | 80 | 0.8625 | 0.34655 | Responsibility | 21 | 0.9524 | 0.21822 | ||||
| Total | 113 | 0.8584 | 0.35019 | Total | 113 | 0.8584 | 0.35019 | Total | 113 | 0.8584 | 0.35019 | ||||
| Colombia | |||||||||||||||
| Optimism | Female | 47 | −0.0718 | 0.79464 |
| <45 | 88 | −0.0201 | 1.05199 | - | No responsibility | 87 | −0.0168 | 1.04077 | NS |
| Male | 71 | 0.0475 | 1.12464 | >45 | 30 | 0.0592 | 0.86231 | Responsibility | 31 | 0.0473 | 0.90804 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.00420 | Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.000420 | Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.00420 | ||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 47 | −0.0906 | 0.93006 |
| <45 | 88 | 0.0681 | 0.99543 | - | No responsibility | 87 | 0.0102 | 0.98079 | NS |
| Male | 71 | 0.0599 | 1.05260 | >45 | 30 | −0.1997 | 1.02010 | Responsibility | 31 | −0.0287 | 1.08359 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.00421 | Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.00421 | Total | 118 | 0.0000 | 1.00421 | ||||
| Ease-of-use of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 47 | 1.13 | 1.583 |
| <45 | 88 | 0.92 | 1.432 | - | No responsibility | 87 | 0.80 | 1.337 | NS |
| Male | 71 | 0.73 | 1.230 | >45 | 30 | 0.80 | 1.270 | Responsibility | 31 | 1.13 | 1.522 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 0.89 | 1.388 | Total | 118 | 0.89 | 1.388 | Total | 118 | 0.89 | 1.388 | ||||
| Propensity to innovate | Female | 47 | 2.98 | 1.011 |
| <45 | 88 | 3.18 | 1.023 | - | No responsibility | 87 | 3.18 | 1.006 | NS |
| Male | 71 | 3.27 | 1.055 | >45 | 30 | 3.07 | 1.112 | Responsibility | 31 | 3.06 | 1.153 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 3.15 | 1.043 | Total | 118 | 3.15 | 1.043 | Total | 118 | 3.15 | 1.043 | ||||
| Telemedicine use | Female | 47 | 0.2128 | 0.41369 |
| <45 | 88 | 0.3636 | 0.48380 | - | No responsibility | 87 | 0.2874 | 0.45515 | * |
| Male | 71 | 0.4085 | 0.49505 | >45 | 30 | 0.2333 | 0.43018 | Responsibility | 31 | 0.4516 | 0.50588 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 0.3305 | 0.47240 | Total | 118 | 0.3305 | 0.47240 | Total | 118 | 0.3305 | 0.47240 | ||||
| Level of ICT use | Female | 47 | 0.5532 | 0.50254 |
| <45 | 88 | 0.6932 | 0.46382 | - | No responsibility | 87 | 0.7011 | 0.46041 | NS |
| Male | 71 | 0.7606 | 0.42978 | >45 | 30 | 0.6333 | 0.49013 | Responsibility | 31 | 0.6129 | 0.49514 | ||||
| Total | 118 | 0.6780 | 0.46925 | Total | 118 | 0.6780 | 0.46925 | Total | 118 | 0.6780 | 0.46925 | ||||
| Bolivia | |||||||||||||||
| Optimism | Female | 113 | −0.0412 | 1.16294 |
| <45 | 184 | −0.0411 | 1.06828 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 0.0254 | 0.98879 | NS |
| Male | 166 | 0.0280 | 0.87805 | >45 | 95 | 0.0795 | 0.85832 | Responsibility | 25 | −0.2587 | 1.11443 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00181 | Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00181 | Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00181 | ||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 113 | −0.1198 | 0.94670 |
| <45 | 184 | −0.0282 | 1.04199 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 0.0230 | 0.99880 | NS |
| Male | 166 | 0.0815 | 1.07059 | >45 | 95 | 0.0544 | 0.92169 | Responsibility | 25 | −0.2344 | 1.02209 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00175 | Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00175 | Total | 279 | 0.0000 | 1.00175 | ||||
| Ease-of-use of ICTs in clinical practice | Female | 113 | 0.44 | 0.499 |
| <45 | 184 | 0.46 | 0.500 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 0.46 | 0.499 | ** |
| Male | 166 | 0.50 | 0.502 | >45 | 95 | 0.51 | 0.503 | Responsibility | 25 | 0.68 | 0.476 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 0.48 | 0.500 | Total | 279 | 0.48 | 0.500 | Total | 279 | 0.48 | 0.500 | ||||
| Propensity to innovate | Female | 113 | 4.21 | 0.700 |
| <45 | 184 | 4.22 | 0.714 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 4.24 | 0.650 | NS |
| Male | 166 | 4.24 | 0.662 | >45 | 95 | 4.25 | 0.601 | Responsibility | 25 | 4.08 | 0.909 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 4.23 | 0.677 | Total | 279 | 4.23 | 0.677 | Total | 279 | 4.23 | 0.677 | ||||
| Telemedicine use | Female | 113 | 0.2566 | 0.43872 |
| <45 | 184 | 0.3750 | 0.48544 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 0.3543 | 0.47925 | *** |
| Male | 166 | 0.4639 | 0.50020 | >45 | 95 | 0.3895 | 0.49022 | Responsibility | 25 | 0.6400 | 0.48990 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 0.3799 | 0.48624 | Total | 279 | 0.3799 | 0.48624 | Total | 279 | 0.3799 | 0.48624 | ||||
| Level of ICT use | Female | 113 | 0.9558 | 0.20656 |
| <45 | 184 | 0.9457 | 0.22732 | - | No responsibility | 254 | 0.9528 | 0.21258 | NS |
| Male | 166 | 0.9458 | 0.22713 | >45 | 95 | 0.9579 | 0.20189 | Responsibility | 25 | 0.9200 | 0.27689 | ||||
| Total | 279 | 0.9498 | 0.21871 | Total | 279 | 0.9498 | 0.21871 | Total | 279 | 0.9498 | 0.21871 | ||||
NS not significant, ***significant at 99% confidence level, **significant at 95% confidence level, *significant at 90% confidence level.
Relationships between the explanatory variables and telemedicine use for the three samples of physicians
|
| S.E. | Wald |
| Significant | Exp(B) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spain | ||||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTS in clinical practice | 0.200 | 0.445 | 0.202 | 1 | 0.653 | 1.222 |
| Ease-of-use of ICTS in clinical practice | 0.667 | 0.364 | 3.354 | 1 | 0.067 | 1.948 |
| Optimism | −0.498 | 0.437 | 1.302 | 1 | 0.254 | 0.607 |
| Propensity to innovate | 0.724 | 0.373 | 3.769 | 1 | 0.052 | 2.062 |
| Level of ICT use | 2.661 | 1.077 | 6.103 | 1 | 0.013 | 14.316 |
| Constant | 0.724 | 0.373 | 3.769 | 1 | 0.052 | 2.062 |
| Chi-square, 24.859; significant, 0.000 | ||||||
| Hosmer-Lemeshow test, 19.273; significant, 0.018 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke R Square, 0.275 | ||||||
| Colombia | ||||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTS in clinical practice | −0.192 | 0.253 | 0.575 | 1 | 0.448 | 0.826 |
| Ease-of-use of ICTS in clinical practice | 0.108 | 0.182 | 0.347 | 1 | 0.556 | 1.113 |
| Optimism | 0.485 | 0.269 | 3.254 | 1 | 0.071 | 1.624 |
| Propensity to innovate | 0.361 | 0.232 | 2.423 | 1 | 0.120 | 1.435 |
| Level of ICT use | 1.212 | 0.511 | 5.626 | 1 | 0.018 | 3.360 |
| Constant | −2.878 | 0.951 | 9.163 | 1 | 0.002 | 0.056 |
| Chi-square, 14.489; significant, 0.013 | ||||||
| Hosmer-Lemeshow test, 14.564; significant, 0.045 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke R Square, 0.161 | ||||||
| Bolivia | ||||||
| Perceived usefulness of ICTS in clinical practice | 0.131 | 0.141 | 0.866 | 1 | 0.352 | 1.140 |
| Ease-of-use of ICTS in clinical practice | 0.321 | 0.256 | 1.571 | 1 | 0.210 | 1.379 |
| Optimism | 0.484 | 0.150 | 10.371 | 1 | 0.001 | 1.622 |
| Propensity to innovate | 0.033 | 0.189 | 0.031 | 1 | 0.861 | 1.034 |
| Level of ICT use | 2.040 | 1.049 | 3.780 | 1 | 0.052 | 7.689 |
| Constant | -2.224 | 1.375 | 2.618 | 1 | 0.106 | 0.108 |
| Chi-square, 20.704; significant, 0.000 | ||||||
| Hosmer-Lemeshow test, 14.705; significant, 0.072 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke R Square, 0.197 |
Accepted and rejected hypotheses for the Spanish, Colombian and Bolivian samples
| Hypotheses | Spain | Colombia | Bolivia |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1. The perceived usefulness of ICTs in clinical practice explains telemedicine use | Rejected | Rejected | Rejected |
| H2. The perceived ease-of-use of ICTs in clinical practice explains telemedicine use | Accepted | Rejected | Rejected |
| H3. The user's optimism about technology explains telemedicine use | Rejected | Accepted | Accepted |
| H4. The user's propensity to innovate explains telemedicine use | Accepted | Rejected | Rejected |
| H5. The ICT user profile of the physician - as an individual, in his or her personal life - explains telemedicine use | Accepted | Accepted | Accepted |
| H6. The degree of ICT implementation in the country's health care system explains the importance of each of the determinants of the physician's telemedicine use | Accepted | Accepted | Accepted |