| Literature DB >> 28666977 |
Tameka McFadyen1, Luke Wolfenden1, John Wiggers1, Jenny Tindall2, Sze Lin Yoong1, Christophe Lecathelinais2, Karen Gillham2, Shauna Sherker3, Bosco Rowland4, Nicola McLaren1, Melanie Kingsland1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The implementation of comprehensive alcohol management strategies can reduce excessive alcohol use and reduce the risk of alcohol-related harm at sporting venues. Supporting sports venues to implement alcohol management strategies via the Web may represent an effective and efficient means of reducing harm caused by alcohol in this setting. However, the feasibility and acceptability of such an approach is unknown.Entities:
Keywords: Internet; TAM; Web; alcohol; eHealth; implementation; sports; technology
Year: 2017 PMID: 28666977 PMCID: PMC5511365 DOI: 10.2196/resprot.6859
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Res Protoc ISSN: 1929-0748
Football club and club administrator representative characteristics (N=46).
| Characteristics | Number | ||
| Australian League Football, n (%) | 6 (13) | ||
| Rugby League, n (%) | 15 (33) | ||
| Soccer/Association football, n (%) | 11 (24) | ||
| Rugby Union, n (%) | 14 (30) | ||
| Major city, n (%) | 38 (88) | ||
| Inner/outer regional, n (%) | 5 (12) | ||
| Small (≤ 10 teams), n (%) | 21 (47) | ||
| Large (>10 teams), n (%) | 24 (53) | ||
| President, n (%) | 15 (33) | ||
| Vice President, n (%) | 4 (9) | ||
| Secretary, n (%) | 14 (30) | ||
| Treasurer, n (%) | 4 (9) | ||
| Coach, n (%) | 1 (2) | ||
| Committee member, n (%) | 2 (4) | ||
| Time in club role, years, mean (SD) | 4.3 (3.2) | ||
| Age, years, mean (SD) | 49 (9.64) | ||
| Gender, male, n (%) | 39 (85) | ||
aN=43.
Proportion of clubs reporting the use of the electronic devices to undertake specific club-related tasks (N=46).
| Club-related task | n (%) |
| Membership and player registration | 45 (98) |
| Game scheduling | 38 (83) |
| Managing club finances/bookkeeping | 44 (96) |
| Communicating with members | 45 (98) |
| Committee administration tasks | 45 (98) |
| Administration fundraising and other events | 44 (96) |
Football clubs perceived usefulness, ease of and intention to use a Web-based program to support implementation of recommended alcohol management policies.
| TAMa items and constructs | Mean (SD) | |
| I would find Good Sports online useful in helping my club implement Good Sports policies. | 6.30 (0.70) | |
| Using Good Sports online would improve my clubs PERFORMANCE in implementing Good Sports policies. | 6.20 (0.96) | |
| Using Good Sports online would increase my clubs PRODUCTIVITY in implementing Good Sports policies. | 6.07 (1.04) | |
| Using Good Sports online would help enhance the EFFECTIVENESS of my club in implementing of Good Sports policies. | 6.11 (0.97) | |
| 6.17 (0.85) | ||
| My interaction with Good Sports online would need to be clear and understandable. | 6.33 (0.97) | |
| Interacting with Good Sports online is not likely to require a lot of my mental effort. | 5.83 (1.32) | |
| I would find Good Sports online easy to get it to do what I want it to do. | 5.89 (1.16) | |
| I would find Good Sports online easy to use. | 5.96 (1.09) | |
| 6.00 (0.99) | ||
| Assuming I had access to Good Sports online, I INTEND to use it. | 6.24 (0.92) | |
| Given that I had access to Good Sports online, I PREDICT that I would use it. | 6.24 (0.90) | |
| If Good Sports online was currently available, I would PLAN to use it in the next 12 months. | 6.28 (0.91) | |
| 6.25 (0.87) | ||
aTAM: Technology Acceptance Model.
bCronbach alpha score of >0.9 for each TAM construct: usefulness, perceived ease of use, and intention to use a Web-based program.
Associations between club and administrator characteristics and perceptions and intention to use a Web-based alcohol management program.
| Characteristics and perceptions | Intention to usea | Relative risk for high intention of use | Fisher’s exact | ||
| Score of 1.0-5.9 | Score of 6.0-7.0 | ||||
| .48 | |||||
| Major city | 4 (11) | 34 (89) | 1.1 (0.8-4.4) | ||
| Inner/outer regional | 1 (20) | 4 (80) | — | ||
| .02 | |||||
| Small | 5 (24) | 16 (76) | 0.8 (0.5-0.9) | ||
| Large | 0 (0) | 24 (100) | — | ||
| .65 | |||||
| 50 years or less | 2 (8) | 23 (92) | 1.1 (0.8-1.5) | ||
| Over 50 years | 3 (14) | 18 (86) | — | ||
| 1.00 | |||||
| 1 or more devices | 5 (11%) | 40 (99%) | 0.9 (0.7-30.8) | ||
| No devices | 0 (0%) | 1 (100%) | — | ||
| 1.00 | |||||
| Yes | 5 (11%) | 40 (89%) | — | ||
| No | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | — | ||
| .02 | |||||
| 1.0-5.9 | 4 (31%) | 9 (69%) | — | ||
| 6.0-7.0 | 1 (3%) | 32 (97%) | 1.4 (1.0-2.9) | ||
| .03 | |||||
| 1.0-5.9 | 3 (37%) | 5 (63%) | — | ||
| 6.0-7.0 | 2 (5%) | 36 (95%) | 1.5 (1.0-6.8) | ||
aScore of 1.0-5.9 indicates response to statements of strongly disagree to slightly agree, and score of 6.0-7.0 indicates response to statements of agree and strongly agree.
bClubs categorized using the Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC), which classifies remoteness based on sports clubs postcodes matching the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA) score.