Alexandra J Greenberg1,2, Danielle Haney3, Kelly D Blake2, Richard P Moser2, Bradford W Hesse2. 1. Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 2. Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 3. Office of Science Policy, Engagement, Education, and Communications, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The increase in use of health information technologies (HIT) presents new opportunities for patient engagement and self-management. Patients in rural areas stand to benefit especially from increased access to health care tools and electronic communication with providers. We assessed the adoption of 4 HIT tools over time by rural or urban residency. METHODS: Analyses were conducted using data from 7 iterations of the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS; 2003-2014). Rural/urban residency was based on the USDA's 2003 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Outcomes of interest included managing personal health information online; whether providers maintain electronic health records (EHRs); e-mailing health care providers; and purchasing medicine online. Bivariate analyses and logistic regression were used to assess relationships between geography and outcomes, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. FINDINGS: In total, 6,043 (17.6%, weighted) of the 33,749 respondents across the 7 administrations of HINTS lived in rural areas. Rural participants were less likely to report regular access to Internet (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.61-0.80). Rural respondents were neither more nor less likely to report that their health care providers maintained EHRs than were urban respondents; however, they had decreased odds of managing personal health information online (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.40-0.78) and e-mailing health care providers (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.49-0.77). CONCLUSIONS: The digital divide between rural and urban residents extends to HIT. Additional investigation is needed to determine whether the decreased use of HIT may be due to lack of Internet connectivity or awareness of these tools.
PURPOSE: The increase in use of health information technologies (HIT) presents new opportunities for patient engagement and self-management. Patients in rural areas stand to benefit especially from increased access to health care tools and electronic communication with providers. We assessed the adoption of 4 HIT tools over time by rural or urban residency. METHODS: Analyses were conducted using data from 7 iterations of the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS; 2003-2014). Rural/urban residency was based on the USDA's 2003 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Outcomes of interest included managing personal health information online; whether providers maintain electronic health records (EHRs); e-mailing health care providers; and purchasing medicine online. Bivariate analyses and logistic regression were used to assess relationships between geography and outcomes, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. FINDINGS: In total, 6,043 (17.6%, weighted) of the 33,749 respondents across the 7 administrations of HINTS lived in rural areas. Rural participants were less likely to report regular access to Internet (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.61-0.80). Rural respondents were neither more nor less likely to report that their health care providers maintained EHRs than were urban respondents; however, they had decreased odds of managing personal health information online (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.40-0.78) and e-mailing health care providers (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.49-0.77). CONCLUSIONS: The digital divide between rural and urban residents extends to HIT. Additional investigation is needed to determine whether the decreased use of HIT may be due to lack of Internet connectivity or awareness of these tools.
Authors: Betty L Chang; Suzanne Bakken; S Scott Brown; Thomas K Houston; Gary L Kreps; Rita Kukafka; Charles Safran; P Zoe Stavri Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2004-08-06 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Bradford W Hesse; Robert T Croyle; Gordon Willis; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; K V Viswanath; Neil Weinstein; Sara Alden Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2004 Sep-Oct
Authors: Bradford W Hesse; Anna Gaysynsky; Allison Ottenbacher; Richard P Moser; Kelly D Blake; Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou; Sana Vieux; Ellen Beckjord Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2014-12
Authors: Laura Shane-McWhorter; Leslie Lenert; Marta Petersen; Sarah Woolsey; Carrie McAdam-Marx; Jeffrey M Coursey; Thomas C Whittaker; Christian Hyer; Deb LaMarche; Patricia Carroll; Libbey Chuy Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2014-07-03 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Jane N Bolin; Gail R Bellamy; Alva O Ferdinand; Ann M Vuong; Bita A Kash; Avery Schulze; Janet W Helduser Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2015-05-07 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Whitney E Zahnd; Natoshia Askelson; Robin C Vanderpool; Lindsay Stradtman; Jean Edward; Paige E Farris; Victoria Petermann; Jan M Eberth Journal: Prev Med Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Angela Starkweather; Cynthia S Jacelon; Suzanne Bakken; Debra L Barton; Annette DeVito Dabbs; Susan G Dorsey; Barbara J Guthrie; Margaret M Heitkemper; Kathleen T Hickey; Teresa J Kelechi; Miyong T Kim; Jenna Marquard; Shirley M Moore; Nancy S Redeker; Rachel F Schiffman; Teresa M Ward; Lynn S Adams; Karen A Kehl; Jeri L Miller Journal: J Nurs Scholarsh Date: 2019-09-30 Impact factor: 3.176
Authors: Whitney E Zahnd; Melinda M Davis; Jason S Rotter; Robin C Vanderpool; Cynthia K Perry; Jackilen Shannon; Linda K Ko; Stephanie B Wheeler; Cassie L Odahowski; Paige E Farris; Jan M Eberth Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Xuewei Chen; Heather Orom; Jennifer L Hay; Erika A Waters; Elizabeth Schofield; Yuelin Li; Marc T Kiviniemi Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Mary A Majumder; Christi J Guerrini; Juli M Bollinger; Robert Cook-Deegan; Amy L McGuire Journal: Genet Med Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 8.822