| Literature DB >> 31752840 |
Lu Lin Zhou1, Joseph Owusu-Marfo2,3, Henry Asante Antwi1, Maxwell Opuni Antwi1, Arielle Doris Tetgoum Kachie1, Sabina Ampon-Wireko1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital electronic information management systems (HEIMS) are widely used in Ghana, and hence its performance must be carefully assessed. Nurses as clinical health personnel are the largest cluster of hospital staff and are the pillar of healthcare delivery. Therefore, they play a crucial role in the adoption and assessment of HEIMSs in Ghana. This report sought to assess the "Social Influence" (SI) and "Facilitating Conditions" (FC) that support Nurses' Acceptance of HEIMS in Ghana using the "Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology" (UTAUT) model.Entities:
Keywords: Electronic health/medical records; Facilitating conditions; Ghana; Health information management; Health technology; Hospital information systems; Nurses; Social influence
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31752840 PMCID: PMC6873399 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-019-0956-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ISSN: 1472-6947 Impact factor: 2.796
Fig. 1Conceptual Model
Measurement Model; Results of AVE (Convergent Validity), CR, CA (Reliability Testing) and KMO (Sampling Adequacy Test)
| Constructs | Mean | S. Dev. | Variance | AVE | CR | CA | KMO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PE | 5.248 | 1.046 | 1.095 | 0.695 | 0.896 | 0.779 | 0.754 |
| EE | 5.600 | 0.934 | 0.873 | 0.801 | 0.941 | 0.915 | 0.802 |
| ATUT | 5.460 | 1.062 | 1.128 | 0.700 | 0.901 | 0.831 | 0.785 |
| SI | 5.386 | 1.078 | 1.163 | 0.633 | 0.859 | 0.709 | 0.745 |
| SE | 5.378 | 1.026 | 1.053 | 0.657 | 0.884 | 0.824 | 0.760 |
| FC | 4.105 | 1.183 | 1.399 | 0.546 | 0.824 | 0.723 | 0.564 |
| ANX | 4.140 | 1.256 | 1.577 | 0.594 | 0.845 | 0.753 | 0.708 |
| BI | 5.583 | 1.195 | 1.429 | 0.944 | 0.985 | 0.980 | 0.873 |
| UB | 6.094 | 1.978 | 3.912 | 0.901 | 0.948 | 0.842 | 0.560 |
NB: – Average Variance Extracted, – Composite Reliability, – Cronbach’s Alpha, - Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and – Standard Deviation. – Social Influence, – Facilitating Conditions, – Behavioral Intention and – Use Behavior
Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
| Parameter | Frequency( | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 20–30 years | 346 | 52.4 |
| 31–40 years | 251 | 38 |
| 41–50 years | 63 | 9.6 |
| Male | 256 | 38.8 |
| Female | 404 | 61.2 |
| 0–5 years | 317 | 48.03 |
| 6–10 years | 163 | 24.70 |
| 11–15 years | 92 | 13.94 |
| 16–20 years | 76 | 11.52 |
| 21–25 years | 12 | 1.81 |
| Staff Nurse | 386 | 58.4 |
| Nursing Officer | 206 | 31.2 |
| Emergency Nurse | 58 | 8.8 |
| Critical Nurse | 5 | 0.8 |
| Pre-Operative Nurse | 5 | 0.8 |
| Completely not voluntary | 173 | 26.2 |
| Not Voluntary | 328 | 49.7 |
| Somewhat not voluntary | 47 | 7.1 |
| Neutral | 31 | 4.7 |
| Somewhat voluntary | 31 | 4.7 |
| Voluntary | 43 | 6.5 |
| Completely voluntary | 7 | 1.1 |
| LHIMS | 488 | 73.9 |
| HAMS | 172 | 26.1 |
LHIMS – Lightwave Health Information Management Systems, HAMS – Hospital Administration Management Systems
Result of Items Loading and Descriptive Statistics of Construct Measurements
| Construct Measurements | Item loading λ | ε | Mean | Cronbach’s alpha (CA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PE1 | 0.880 | 0.226 | 5.760 | .943 |
| PE2 | 0.947 | 0.103 | 5.640 | .943 |
| PE3 | 0.928 | 0.139 | 5.730 | .942 |
| PE4 | 0.496 | 0.754 | 3.860 | .946 |
| EE1 | 0.914 | 0.165 | 5.540 | .942 |
| EE2 | 0.868 | 0.247 | 5.570 | .942 |
| EE3 | 0.932 | 0.131 | 5.640 | .943 |
| EE4 | 0.864 | 0.254 | 5.650 | .943 |
| ATUT1 | 0.592 | 0.650 | 5.660 | .945 |
| ATUT2 | 0.913 | 0.166 | 5.500 | .942 |
| ATUT3 | 0.893 | 0.203 | 5.230 | .942 |
| ATUT4 | 0.904 | 0.183 | 5.450 | .942 |
| SI1 | 0.913 | 0.166 | 5.700 | .942 |
| SI2 | 0.909 | 0.174 | 5.830 | .942 |
| SI3 | 0.280 | 0.922 | 3.870 | .946 |
| SI4 | 0.890 | 0.208 | 6.140 | .943 |
| SE1 | 0.842 | 0.290 | 5.400 | .942 |
| SE2 | 0.667 | 0.555 | 5.830 | .944 |
| SE3 | 0.904 | 0.182 | 5.150 | .942 |
| SE4 | 0.811 | 0.343 | 5.120 | .943 |
| FC1 | 0.550 | 0.698 | 5.530 | .943 |
| FC2 | 0.691 | 0.523 | 5.100 | .943 |
| FC3 | 0.843 | 0.289 | 2.900 | .946 |
| FC4 | 0.833 | 0.306 | 2.890 | .947 |
| ANX1 | 0.402 | 0.838 | 5.020 | .943 |
| ANX2 | 0.860 | 0.260 | 3.800 | .948 |
| ANX3 | 0.886 | 0.215 | 3.610 | .948 |
| ANX4 | 0.830 | 0.311 | 4.130 | .947 |
| BI1 | 0.985 | 0.030 | 5.590 | .942 |
| BI2 | 0.976 | 0.047 | 5.610 | .942 |
| BI3 | 0.980 | 0.040 | 5.580 | .942 |
| BI4 | 0.945 | 0.107 | 5.550 | .943 |
| UB1 | 0.949 | 0.099 | 7.820 | .944 |
| UB2 | 0.949 | 0.099 | 4.370 | .942 |
λ – factor loadings values, ε – error of the construct measurements values. – Social Influence, – Facilitating Conditions, – Behavioral Intention, and
– Use Behavior
Explained Variance of Constructs
| Independent Variables (IV) | Dependent Variables (DV) | R-squared (R2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constructs | Moderators | ||
| SI | no | BI | |
| SI | age, gender, prof. Exp. & Vol. | ||
| FC | no | ||
| FC | age, gender, prof. Exp. & Vol. | ||
| SI & FC | age, gender, prof. Exp. & Vol. | ||
| SI | na | UB | |
| FC | na | ||
| BI | na | ||
| SI, FC & BI | na | ||
R is the amount of variance in the dependent variable () that is accounted for or explained by the independent variable(s) (). – Behavioural Intention, – Use Behaviour, – Social Influence and – Facilitating Conditions. – not applicable, - Voluntariness
Fig. 2Standard Values of Structural Model
Structural Model; Hypothesis Testing Results
| Hypothesis | Parameter | R2 | Estimate | S. E | C. R | Significance | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | BI <--- SI | 0.38 | .55 | .04 | 14.06 | *** | Accepted |
| H2 | UB < --- SI | 0.43 | .77 | .07 | 11.76 | *** | Accepted |
| H3 | BI <--- FC | 0.16 | .16 | .03 | 4.80 | *** | Accepted |
| H4 | UB < --- FC | 0.14 | .07 | .05 | 1.44 | 0.15 | Rejected |
| H5 | UB < --- BI | 0.40 | .59 | .06 | 10.22 | *** | Accepted |
NB: p-value < 0.001, .- Standard Error, – Critical Ratio, – Social Influence, – Facilitating Conditions, – Behavioural Intention and – Use Behaviour. R – Square root of correlation coefficients of the intercepts
Partial Correlation Matrix of Constructs
| Measure | Age | Gender | Prof. Experience | Vol | SI | FC | BI | UB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||||||
| Gender | −.051 | |||||||
| Prof. Experience | .818** | −.043 | ||||||
| Vol | .165** | .033 | −.259** | |||||
| SI | .157** | −.176** | .162** | −.244** | ||||
| FC | .147** | −.110** | .143** | .008 | .448** | |||
| BI | .135** | −.217** | .184** | −.219** | .612** | .399** | ||
| UB | .200** | −.159** | .264** | −.316** | .657** | .375** | .630** | |
NB: **Correlation is significant at p-values < 0.01, the bold values on the leading diagonal show the discriminant validity (DV) of the constructs and the non-diagonal values are the correlation coefficients between the constructs. – Social Influence, – Facilitating Conditions, – Behavioural Intention, – Use Behaviour, - Voluntariness