Literature DB >> 31440113

Internet use and eHealth literacy among health-care professionals in a resource limited setting: a cross-sectional survey.

Kirubel Biruk Shiferaw1, Eden Abetu Mehari2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health-care professionals should be able to identify and use reputable health care-information sources from the Internet and other relevant sources of information, in order to make good medical decisions. The level in health professional eHealth literacy and the extent of Internet use in a resource-constrained setting is not well documented. The aim of this study was to assess the extent of Internet use and eHealth literacy among a cross section of health-care professionals at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, northwest Ethiopia.
METHODS: An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted to assess Internet use and eHealth literacy among health professionals working at the hospital from November 20 to January 17, 2018. Descriptive analysis was used to describe Internet use and eHealth literacy. Multivariable logistic regression was done to identify which factors were associated with the eHealth literacy of participants.
RESULTS: In total, 291 study subjects were approached and included in the study, with a response rate of 98.6%. The majority of respondents were female (53.7%) and the mean age was 30.09±5.025 years. Only 47.4% of survey respondents said that they used the Internet regularly for professional/medical updates. The mean eHealth literacy was 27.840±5.691. The majority of participants with high eHealth literacy were aged 21-29 years. and females were slightly more literate regarding eHealth than males (33.1%). Age, type of profession, salary, and years of experience were significantly associated with eHealth literacy.
CONCLUSION: The present data confirm that Internet use and eHealth literacy of health professionals is noticeably good, which clearly suggests that there is an opportunity for eHealth to be integrated in the health-care system in tertiary-health facilities in northern Ethiopia if appropriate training and education is provided.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ethiopia; Internet use; eHealth literacy; health professionals

Year:  2019        PMID: 31440113      PMCID: PMC6664426          DOI: 10.2147/AMEP.S205414

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract        ISSN: 1179-7258


Introduction

The Internet is one of the main sources of information that enables users to have access to a larger volume of information in many sectors, regardless of geographic location. Surveys have indicated that most Internet users in the world have used the Internet to get health information.1–3 Developments in Internet access and improvements in performance due to new technologies have made the Internet the focus of many new health-care improvements.3–7 As a result, the Internet is having a significant impact on health and health care, as it has the potential to advance the health-care delivery and support the decision-making of health-care providers.8 When compared with other professionals of different disciplines, health-care professionals use the Internet more.9 The impact of the Internet on the health-care profession looks to increase as health-care professionals use it more as an instrument to them stay informed and up to date on recent improvements in their respective specialties.9–11 According to Internet World Stats, the number of Internet users in Ethiopia has increased from 10,000 users to more than 16 million in the past two decades, with 15% Internet penetration.12 Although there have been no studies done in the areas of Internet cost and availability in Ethiopia, it is relatively costly when compared to other developed nations. The concept of eHealth literacy is defined as “the ability to seek, find, understand, and appraise health information from electronic sources and apply the knowledge gained to address or solve a health problem.”13 eHealth literacy includes six basic skills: traditional literacy, health literacy, information literacy, scientific literacy, media literacy, and computer literacy. As a result, eHealth literacy is affected by such factors as age, sex, education, availability and accessibility of the Internet, and income.13–16 Studies have shown that distorted information may influence health beliefs and behavior of individuals negatively.17,18 Health-care professionals should be able to identify and use reliable health care–information sources from the Internet, in order to make sound decisions and interventions.19 The existing literature has mainly focused on developed countries. There have been few studies done in developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Studies have been conducted regarding computer literacy and utilization among Ethiopian health professionals and medical students, which were reported to be low.20–23 However, health-care professionals’ perspectives on Internet use and their eHealth literacy are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the extent of Internet use and evaluate eHealth literacy among a cross section of health-care professionals at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital (UOGSH), northwest Ethiopia.

Methods

Study design and setting

An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted to assess Internet use and eHealth literacy among health professionals working at the UOGSH from November 20 to January 17, 2018. During the study period, the UOGCSH had 834 permanent health-professional employees. The majority were nurses (483), medical laboratory technicians (110), and midwives (95). All health professionals who were on annual and sick leave were excluded. There were desktop computers in some departments, and very few of them had Internet connections. Most of the departments did not use the computers for information-seeking or quick referencing; rather, they used them for recording purposes only.

Sampling and participants

The sample for this study was calculated by using a single population–proportion formula, with finite population correction,24 95% confidence level, and a proportion of Internet use of 50%, since there had been no previous study done in the same population, with relative precision of 5% and 10% nonresponse rates. The sample-size formula was valid for this study, because the calculated sample was >5% of the total study population. As such, we needed to use the formula with finite-population correction: where n' is sample size with finite-population correction, N population size, Z the Z-statistic for level of confidence, P expected proportion, and d precision. Accordingly, the total sample was 291. A simple random-sampling technique was performed to select study participants.

Data acquisition and analysis

A self-administered structured questionnaire was adapted after reviewing the relevant literature.9,25,26 It had been validated and pretested on 30 health professionals working at Debre Markos Referral Hospital for its consistency.27 The questionnaire has three main parts. The first part contains items on sociodemographic information of participants. The second part is related to participants’ use of the Internet, and the third part contains items to evaluate eHealth literacy of the participants. We asked participants 15 categorical (yes/no) items to determine their use of and access to the Internet. The eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) was used as a measuring tool, as it has high internal consistency (α=0.88).25 The eHEALS measures the ability to locate, evaluate, integrate, and apply information gained from the Internet. Respondents evaluate their level of agreement with alternatives (strongly agree, agree, undecided and disagree) on the eight items. One can score a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 40 in this section. After collection, data were checked, cleaned, and analyzed using Epi Info and SPSS version 20. Descriptive analysis was performed to describe Internet use and eHealth literacy. Binary logistic regression was done to identify which factors were associated with eHealth literacy.

Operational definitions

In this study, “Internet use” referred to health professionals’ practice of using the Internet for browsing health-related information to make sound decisions, whereas “eHealth literacy” referred to participants' ability to locate and use credible information from the Internet. An eHealth-literacy score of 26 was used as a cutoff point to determine the level of eHealth literacy of participants. After a relevant-literature review, we labeled eHEALS score ≥26 as high eHealth literacy and eHEALS score <26 as low eHealth literacy.28–31Ethical clearance was secured from the Department of Health Informatics, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Markos University ethical review committee. Additional permission was obtained from the offices of UOGCSH hospital directors, and verbal informed consent from respondents was also attained. Verbal informed consent was acceptable and approved by the ethical review committee.

Results

In total, 291 study subjects were approached and included in the study from November 20 to January 17, 2018. The response rate was 98.6%. The majority of respondents (154, 53.7%) were females, and the mean age was 30.09±5.025 years. A large number of respondents were bachelor's degree holders (220, 76.7%). Most study participants were nurses 88 (30.7%), and regarding work experience, employees with <5 years of work experience (167, 58.2%) comprised the majority. A total of 191 (66.6%) respondents were employees earning a monthly salary of ETB 3,500–5,500 (Table 1).
Table 1

Participants’ sociodemographic characteristics

n%n%
SexProfession
Male13346.3%Medical doctor196.6%
Female15453.7%Nurse8830.7%
Age, yearsHealth officer93.1%
21–2917159.6%Lab technician5017.4%
30–399432.8%Midwife6422.3%
>39227.7%Pharmacist5719.9
EducationYears of experience
Diploma (certificate)5519.2%<516758.2%
Degree (BSc)22076.7%5–108630.0%
Master's (MPH/MSc)124.2%>103411.8%
Salary (ETB)
1,500–3,5005418.8%
3,500–5,50020370.7%
>5,5003010.5%
Participants’ sociodemographic characteristics

Internet use

Overall, 100% of health professionals reported that they had access to the Internet, of which 41.5% used smart phones and 54% of them a wi-fi connection to access the Internet. In sum, 41.8% of respondents had Internet access in their office, and 42.2% reported that they used the Internet several days a week. Only 47.4% of survey respondents said that they used the Internet regularly for professional/medical updates, while 66.2% stated that they would take certified web-based courses. See Table 2 for details.
Table 2

Internet access and use

Questionsn%
Do you have Internet access?Yes287100
No
If yes, select the type of connectionDSL/cable7827.2
Wi-fi15554.0
Mobile data5418.8
If you have Internet access, where do you have it?Office12041.8
Cafés/hotels289.8
Campus lab/wi-fi10034.8
Home3913.6
If you use the Internet, how frequently do you use it?Daily6723.3
Several days a week12142.2
Weekly6121.3
<One day a week3813.2
By what means do you access the Internet?Smartphone11941.5
Laptop11339.4
Tablet144.9
Desktop4114.3
Do you use the Internet regularly for medical/professional updates?Yes13647.4
No15152.6
Does information from websites influence your decision-making?Yes17360.3
No11439.7
Have you ever advised a website for a patient?Yes72.4
No28097.6
Has a patient ever asked for the name of a website for more information on their condition?Yes
No287100
If yes, have you ever recommended any?Yes
No
Do you trust the general quality of medical websites?Yes9633.4
No19166.6
Internet access and use

eHealth literacy

Of the 287 participants, 199 (69.3%) reported that they had high eHealth literacy. Mean eHealth literacy was 27.840±5.691. The majority of participants with high eHealth literacy were aged 21–29 years, and females (104, 36.2%) were slightly more literate regarding eHealth than males (95, 33.1%). A total of 128 (44.6%) health professionals with less <5 years' work experience reported that they possessed high eHealth literacy. Among various health professionals, Nursesnand degree holders reported higher level of eHealth literacy. For more detail, see Table 3.
Table 3

eHealth literacy–response frequency and percentage

High eHealth literacy (%)Low eHealth literacy (%)
Sex
Male95 (33.1%)38 (13.2%)
Female104 (36.2%)50 (17.4%)
Age, years
21–29127 (44.3%)44 (15.3%)
30–3962 (21.6%)32 (11.1%)
>3910 (3.5%)12 (4.2%)
Educational status
Diploma31 (10.8%)24 (8.4%)
Degree159 (55.4%)61 (21.3%)
Master's9 (3.1%)3 (1.0%)
Profession
Medical doctor19 (6.6%)
Nurse65 (22.6%)23 (8.0%)
Health officer9 (3.1%)
Medical lab technician35 (12.2%)13 (4.5%)
Pharmacist35 (12.2%)22 (7.7%)
Midwife36 (12.4%)28 (9.8%)
Years of experience
<5128 (44.6%)39 (13.6%)
5–1056 (19.5%)30 (10.4%)
>1015 (5.2%)19 (6.6%)
Salary (ETB)
1,500–3,50031 (10.8%)23 (8.0%)
3,500–5,500141 (49.1%)62 (21.6%)
>5,50027 (9.4%)3 (1.0%)
eHealth literacy–response frequency and percentage From the eHEALS, the statement “I know what health resources are available on the Internet” had the highest level of agreement (254 of 287, 88.5%). The two statements that health professionals had the highest level of disagreement with were related to confidence in using information received from the Internet to make health decisions (129 of 287 [45.5%] disagreed and strongly disagreed) and ability to find helpful resources on the Internet (103 of 287 [35.9%] disagreed and strongly disagreed). On binary logistic regression, age 20–29 years, physicians, and those with <5 years' work experience demonstrated a higher likelihood of self-reported eHealth literacy. See Table 4 for details.
Table 4

Multivariable logistic regression for eHealth literacy

Independent variablesDependent variables(eHealth literacy)
Coefficient estimateLower confidence levelUpper confidence levelP-value
Age, years
21–291.1821.3208.0580.010*
30–390.8440.9075.9600.079
Sex
Male0.2430.7712.1080.345
Education
Degree0.6571.0513.5430.034*
Master's0.8430.5669.5240.242
Profession
Physician1.8891.40931.0290.017*
Nurse0.7881.1074.3630.024*
Health officer0.8201.3686.0250.084
Medical lab technician0.5960.8313.9620.135
Pharmacist0.2130.5982.5600.566
Salary (ETB)
3,500–5,5000.5230.9113.1260.096
>5,5001.3110.1661.2430.020*
Years of experience
<51.3921.8728.6390.000*
5–100.8101.0025.0390.049*

Notes: Reference groups: age (>39 years), sex (female), education (diploma), profession (midwife), salary (ETB1,500–3,500), years of experience (>10). *P<0.05).

Multivariable logistic regression for eHealth literacy Notes: Reference groups: age (>39 years), sex (female), education (diploma), profession (midwife), salary (ETB1,500–3,500), years of experience (>10). *P<0.05).

Discussion

The findings from this study revealed that although health professionals have access to use the Internet, most do not use it for searching reputable health information from online databases like PubMed and websites. Their self-reported eHealth literacy was also found to be reasonably good. Internet access in this study was 100%, but in other relevant studies conducted in developed countries, there was relatively less access. This disparity could be because of study setting: this study was conducted at a single institution.9,32 In sum, 47.4% of participants in this study confirmed that they used the Internet for regular medical/professional updates, which is very low compared to health-care professionals in developed countries like the UK, where it is 97%.33 A possible reason for this could be the poor computer hardware and very slow Internet connection at the hospital. More than half the participants in this study were willing to take certified web-based courses, similar to online surveys among health professionals in other countries.34,35 The effect of Internet use on clinical decisions was also notably significant and confirmed studies conducted in the US and Taiwan.36,37 On the contrary, the quality of health-care information was less trusted, similar to findings of Benigeri and Pluye.38 Only 2.4% of health professionals recommended a website for their patients. On the other hand, patients never asked health professionals for a website recommendation to get more information on their condition, and this could have been due to the socioeconomic and infrastructural limitations of the underdeveloped world.35,39 Our findings in this study illustrate that physicians use the Internet for medical updates more and other professionals like pharmacists and medical laboratory technicians use the Internet for finding health-related information less, which is similar to studies in Nigeria and Malaysia.40,41 Regarding eHealth literacy, this study found that most health professionals (69.3%) reported high eHealth literacy, which confirms other findings.42 This study revealed that doctors and nurses had higher eHealth literacy than pharmacists and other health professionals, which confirms a Scottish study.43 Monthly salary and years of experience were predictive of low eHealth literacy. This could be due to lower-paid health professionals not usually being degree holders, which implies that they do not have college education. Aside from the concept of digitizing health care being a new concept for underdeveloped countries like Ethiopia, health professionals with more work experience are unwilling to use new technologies. Although it was not on the regression table, Internet use significantly predicted the eHealth literacy of health professionals, which coincides with other research.42Finally, although the majority of health professionals have access to the Internet, most of them do not use it for finding health information from credible sources. Findings from the eHEALS indicate high potential for future developments in eHealth interventions. The hospital might consider conduct training on how to find credible health information from reputable online sources.

Limitation

The major limitation of this study was the small sample, which was due to limited resources, and it was conducted among health professionals working at the UOGSH. For this reason, the results may not be attributable to the entire health-professional population. It would be more useful and generalizable if this study were conducted in the Amhara region as a whole with appropriate stratum samples to determine the extent of Internet use and eHealth literacy of a larger sample of health professionals in more facilities than we were able to cover.

Conclusion

Besides the mounting indication of efficacy, the present data confirm that Internet use and eHealth literacy of health professionals are noticeably good. This clearly suggests that there is an opportunity for eHealth to be fully integrated into the health-care system at tertiary-health facilities if appropriate training and education is provided.
  39 in total

1.  Shortcomings of health information on the Internet.

Authors:  Mike Benigeri; Pierre Pluye
Journal:  Health Promot Int       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.483

2.  Access to the internet in an acute care area: experiences of nurses.

Authors:  A M Tod; J Harrison; S Morris Docker; R Black; D Wolstenholme
Journal:  Br J Nurs       Date:  2003 Apr 10-23

3.  Making the future of healthcare.

Authors:  Muir Gray
Journal:  Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes       Date:  2008

4.  Assessment of internet use and effects among healthcare professionals: a cross sectional survey.

Authors:  V K Podichetty; J Booher; M Whitfield; R S Biscup
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.401

5.  Evaluation of interactive online courses for advanced practice nurses.

Authors:  Alicia Huckstadt; Karen Hayes
Journal:  J Am Acad Nurse Pract       Date:  2005-03

6.  Physician trust moderates the Internet use and physician visit relationship.

Authors:  Chul-Joo Lee; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb

7.  eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale.

Authors:  Cameron D Norman; Harvey A Skinner
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Use of the Internet for health information by physicians for patient care in a teaching hospital in Ibadan, Nigeria.

Authors:  Grace A Ajuwon
Journal:  Biomed Digit Libr       Date:  2006-12-12

Review 9.  eHealth Literacy: Essential Skills for Consumer Health in a Networked World.

Authors:  Cameron D Norman; Harvey A Skinner
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2006-06-16       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Trusted online sources of health information: differences in demographics, health beliefs, and health-information orientation.

Authors:  Mohan Dutta-Bergman
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2003-09-25       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  10 in total

1.  The Associations among Gender, Age, eHealth Literacy, Beliefs about Medicines and Medication Adherence among Elementary and Secondary School Teachers.

Authors:  Chiao Ling Huang; Chia Hsing Chiang; Shu Ching Yang; Fu-Zong Wu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Internet use and eHealth literacy among health-care professionals in a resource limited setting: a cross-sectional survey [Letter].

Authors:  Diana Velazquez-Pimentel; Amaury Trockels; Eleanor Smith
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2019-09-09

3.  Electronic Health Literacy in Individuals with Chronic Pain and Its Association with Psychological Function.

Authors:  Elena Castarlenas; Elisabet Sánchez-Rodríguez; Rubén Roy; Catarina Tomé-Pires; Ester Solé; Mark P Jensen; Jordi Miró
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-11-28       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Improving Emergency Department Patient-Physician Conversation Through an Artificial Intelligence Symptom-Taking Tool: Mixed Methods Pilot Observational Study.

Authors:  Justus Scheder-Bieschin; Bibiana Blümke; Erwin de Buijzer; Fabienne Cotte; Fabian Echterdiek; Júlia Nacsa; Marta Ondresik; Matthias Ott; Gregor Paul; Tobias Schilling; Anne Schmitt; Paul Wicks; Stephen Gilbert
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-02-07

5.  Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Sinhala version of electronic health literacy scale: A cross-sectional validation study.

Authors:  Sarath Rathnayake; Indrajith Prasanna Liyanage
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Medical documentation practice and associated factors among health workers at private hospitals in the Amhara region, Ethiopia 2021.

Authors:  Mulugeta Desalegn Kasaye; Miftah Abdella Beshir; Berhanu Fikadie Endehabtu; Binyam Tilahun; Habtamu Alganeh Guadie; Shekur Mohammed Awol; Mulugeta Hayelom Kalayou; Tesfahun Melese Yilma
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-04-09       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Patients' Willingness and Ability to Identify and Respond to Errors in Their Personal Health Records: Mixed Methods Analysis of Cross-sectional Survey Data.

Authors:  Rachael Lear; Lisa Freise; Matthew Kybert; Ara Darzi; Ana Luisa Neves; Erik K Mayer
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 7.076

Review 8.  Digital Health Competencies Among Health Care Professionals: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jessica Longhini; Giacomo Rossettini; Alvisa Palese
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 7.076

9.  Validation of the Ethiopian Version of eHealth Literacy Scale (ET-eHEALS) in a Population with Chronic Disease.

Authors:  Kirubel Biruk Shiferaw
Journal:  Risk Manag Healthc Policy       Date:  2020-05-21

10.  Health Literacy, eHealth Literacy, Adherence to Infection Prevention and Control Procedures, Lifestyle Changes, and Suspected COVID-19 Symptoms Among Health Care Workers During Lockdown: Online Survey.

Authors:  Binh N Do; Tien V Tran; Dung T Phan; Hoang C Nguyen; Thao T P Nguyen; Huu C Nguyen; Tung H Ha; Hung K Dao; Manh V Trinh; Thinh V Do; Hung Q Nguyen; Tam T Vo; Nhan P T Nguyen; Cuong Q Tran; Khanh V Tran; Trang T Duong; Hai X Pham; Lam V Nguyen; Kien T Nguyen; Peter W S Chang; Tuyen Van Duong
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 5.428

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.