| Literature DB >> 31163076 |
Kuei-Fang Ho1, Cheng-Hsun Ho2, Min-Huey Chung1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The nursing process system (NPS) is used to establish the nursing process involving assessment, diagnosis, planning, intervention, and evaluation in solving the health problems of patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31163076 PMCID: PMC6548361 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217622
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The 3Q model adopted in this study.
Demographics of the participants (n = 222).
| Variable | Sample Size | % |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 10 | 4.50 |
| Female | 212 | 95.50 |
| Senior vocational school | 4 | 1.80 |
| Associate degree | 88 | 39.64 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 120 | 54.05 |
| Master’s degree | 10 | 4.50 |
| Staff | 215 | 96.85 |
| Supervisor | 7 | 3.15 |
| 0–5 | 72 | 32.43 |
| 6–10 | 61 | 27.48 |
| 11–15 | 44 | 19.82 |
| 16–20 | 28 | 12.61 |
| >20 | 17 | 7.66 |
| 0–5 | 190 | 85.59 |
| 6–10 | 21 | 9.46 |
| >10 | 11 | 4.95 |
| Yes | 81 | 36.49 |
| No | 141 | 63.51 |
Factor loadings, CR, and AVE for the study variables.
| Construct | Factor Loadings | CR | AVE | Cronbach’s α | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Currency | 0.81–0.95 | 0.91 | 0.77 | 0.85 | |
| Completeness | 0.85–0.94 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.87 | |
| Format | 0.92–0.94 | 0.93 | 0.86 | 0.84 | |
| Accuracy | 0.91–0.92 | 0.91 | 0.84 | 0.81 | |
| Information Quality | 0.92–0.95 | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.92 | 0.74 |
| Reliability | 0.80–0.90 | 0.88 | 0.72 | 0.80 | |
| Accessibility | 0.89–0.93 | 0.94 | 0.84 | 0.90 | |
| Flexibility | 0.93–0.95 | 0.91 | 0.83 | 0.80 | |
| Timeliness | 0.85–0.89 | 0.91 | 0.76 | 0.84 | |
| System Quality | 0.95–0.96 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.56 |
| Empathy | 0.91–0.92 | 0.91 | 0.84 | 0.81 | |
| Service Reliability | 0.84–0.95 | 0.91 | 0.78 | 0.86 | |
| Tangible | 0.93–0.94 | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.93 | |
| Assurance | 0.91–0.92 | 0.94 | 0.84 | 0.90 | |
| Responsiveness | 0.93–0.94 | 0.93 | 0.88 | 0.86 | |
| Service Quality | 0.84–0.91 | 0.87 | 0.77 | 0.71 | 0.75 |
| User Satisfaction | 0.80–0.89 | 0.89 | 0.72 | 0.81 | 0.75 |
| Perceived Enjoyment | 0.94–0.95 | 0.96 | 0.89 | 0.94 | 0.42 |
| Perceived Ease Of Use | 0.78–0.92 | 0.91 | 0.73 | 0.87 | 0.61 |
| Perceived Usefulness | 0.91–0.94 | 0.96 | 0.86 | 0.94 | 0.59 |
| Behavioral Attitude | 0.92–0.95 | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.93 | 0.66 |
| Intention | 0.94–0.96 | 0.97 | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.53 |
CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted; CUR = Currency; COM = Completeness; FOR = Format; ACU = Accuracy; IQ = Information Quality; REL = Reliability; ACE = Accessibility; FLE = Flexibility; TIM = Timeliness; SysQ = System Quality; EMP = Empathy; SER = Service Reliability; TAN = Tangible; ASS = Assurance; RES = Responsiveness; SQ = Service Quality; US = User Satisfaction; PEOU = Perceived Ease of Use; PU = Perceived Usefulness; PE = Perceived Enjoyment; BA = Behavioral Attitude
Correlation coefficients and AVE for the study variables.
| 1. CUR | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2. COM | 0.62 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 3. FOR | 0.64 | 0.80 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 4. ACU | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.77 | |||||||||||||||||||
| 5. IQ | 0.65 | 0.79 | 0.76 | 0.76 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 6. REL | 0.65 | 0.70 | 0.65 | 0.60 | 0.67 | |||||||||||||||||
| 7. ACE | 0.76 | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.63 | 0.71 | 0.70 | ||||||||||||||||
| 8. FLE | 0.68 | 0.65 | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.72 | 0.64 | 0.78 | |||||||||||||||
| 9. TIM | 0.77 | 0.63 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.60 | 0.75 | 0.63 | ||||||||||||||
| 10. SysQ | 0.60 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.74 | 0.78 | 0.70 | 0.64 | 0.61 | 0.60 | |||||||||||||
| 11. EMP | 0.60 | 0.69 | 0.70 | 0.76 | 0.71 | 0.57 | 0.61 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.73 | ||||||||||||
| 12. SER | 0.62 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.70 | 0.74 | 0.62 | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.58 | 0.69 | 0.74 | |||||||||||
| 13. TAN | 0.49 | 0.71 | 0.72 | 0.70 | 0.74 | 0.55 | 0.58 | 0.59 | 0.52 | 0.75 | 0.66 | 0.70 | ||||||||||
| 14. ASS | 0.54 | 0.71 | 0.76 | 0.75 | 0.73 | 0.62 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.54 | 0.75 | 0.74 | 0.72 | 0.78 | |||||||||
| 15. RES | 0.59 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.72 | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.57 | 0.61 | 0.66 | 0.64 | 0.72 | 0.67 | 0.78 | ||||||||
| 16. SQ | 0.57 | 0.77 | 0.73 | 0.68 | 0.79 | 0.68 | 0.65 | 0.62 | 0.57 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.72 | 0.77 | 0.73 | |||||||
| 17. US | 0.65 | 0.79 | 0.77 | 0.76 | 0.79 | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.68 | 0.65 | 0.80 | 0.78 | 0.70 | 0.72 | 0.76 | 0.70 | 0.79 | ||||||
| 18. PE | 0.41 | 0.74 | 0.59 | 0.53 | 0.64 | 0.61 | 0.51 | 0.53 | 0.44 | 0.65 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.60 | 0.53 | 0.70 | 0.64 | |||||
| 19. PEOU | 0.51 | 0.73 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.65 | 0.69 | 0.59 | 0.59 | 0.51 | 0.65 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.58 | 0.54 | 0.72 | 0.74 | 0.68 | ||||
| 20. PU | 0.53 | 0.65 | 0.62 | 0.61 | 0.65 | 0.79 | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.49 | 0.67 | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.57 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.68 | 0.70 | 0.58 | 0.73 | |||
| 21. BA | 0.50 | 0.75 | 0.67 | 0.64 | 0.73 | 0.64 | 0.55 | 0.59 | 0.52 | 0.69 | 0.61 | 0.60 | 0.66 | 0.64 | 0.60 | 0.74 | 0.78 | 0.70 | 0.72 | 0.73 | ||
| 22. Intention | 0.38 | 0.64 | 0.56 | 0.49 | 0.53 | 0.65 | 0.45 | 0.42 | 0.37 | 0.56 | 0.51 | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.53 | 0.49 | 0.59 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.66 |
The square root of the AVE for each latent variable is displayed in bold. Values below the diagonal line are Pearson’s correlation coefficients.
Fig 2Analysis path of the structural model.
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001.
Path coefficients, VIF, and results of the research hypotheses.
| Hypothesis | Relationship | Path Coefficient | T-Value | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | SysQ → IQ | 0.23 | 3.27 | Supported |
| H2 | SysQ → SQ | 0.10 | 1.65 | Not Supported |
| H3 | IQ → SQ | 0.25 | 3.35 | Supported |
| H4 | SysQ → US | 0.37 | 5.90 | Supported |
| H5 | IQ → US | 0.25 | 3.42 | Supported |
| H6 | SQ → US | 0.32 | 4.47 | Supported |
| H7 | US → PU | 0.36 | 4.36 | Supported |
| H8 | US → PEOU | 0.51 | 8.45 | Supported |
| H9 | US → PE | 0.65 | 10.23 | Supported |
| H10 | PE → PEOU | 0.35 | 4.95 | Supported |
| H11 | PEOU → PU | 0.47 | 6.16 | Supported |
| H12 | PU → Intention | 0.46 | 5.56 | Supported |
| H13 | PU → BA | 0.36 | 3.60 | Supported |
| H14 | PEOU →BA | 0.24 | 2.48 | Supported |
| H15 | PE →BA | 0.33 | 4.54 | Supported |
| H16 | BA → Intention | 0.33 | 3.69 | Supported |
*p < 0.05;
**p < 0.01;
***p < 0.001
Total and direct effects of the variables on the intention for using the NPS.
| Variable | Total effect | Direct effect | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intention on intention | IQ | SySQ | SQ | US | PE | PEOU | PU | BA | Intention | |
| CUR | 0.02 | 0.14 | ||||||||
| COM | 0.05 | 0.29 | ||||||||
| FOR | 0.01 | 0.08 | ||||||||
| ACU | 0.04 | 0.23 | ||||||||
| IQ | 0.17 | 0.25 | 0.25 | |||||||
| REL | 0.11 | 0.45 | ||||||||
| ACE | 0.03 | 0.10 | ||||||||
| FLE | 0.03 | 0.14 | ||||||||
| TIM | 0.04 | 0.17 | ||||||||
| SysQ | 0.25 | 0.23 | 0.10 | 0.37 | ||||||
| EMP | 0.03 | 0.16 | ||||||||
| SER | 0.02 | 0.14 | ||||||||
| TAN | 0.01 | 0.05 | ||||||||
| ASS | 0.02 | 0.15 | ||||||||
| RES | 0.03 | 0.13 | ||||||||
| SQ | 0.17 | 0.32 | ||||||||
| US | 0.53 | 0.65 | 0.51 | 0.36 | ||||||
| PE | 0.23 | 0.35 | 0.33 | |||||||
| PEOU | 0.35 | 0.47 | 0.24 | |||||||
| PU | 0.58 | 0.36 | 0.46 | |||||||
| BA | 0.33 | 0.33 | ||||||||
*p < 0.05;
**p < 0.01;
***p < 0.001