Caitlin Horsham1,2, Centaine Snoswell1, Dimitrios Vagenas2, Lois J Loescher3, Nicole Gillespie4, H Peter Soyer5, Monika Janda6,7. 1. Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. The University of Arizona Colleges of Nursing and Public Health, and The University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona, USA. 4. UQ Business School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 5. The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, The University of Queensland, Dermatology Research Centre, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 6. Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, m.janda@uq.edu.au. 7. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, m.janda@uq.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous cross-sectional research indicates high acceptance of mobile teledermoscopy-enhanced skin self-examination (SSE) by consumers based on the technology acceptance model (TAM) domains: perceived usefulness, ease of use, compatibility, attitude and intention, subjective norms, facilitator, and trust. However, no study has assessed this outcome longitudinally among people who actually used the technology in their own homes. METHODS:Participants were living in Brisbane, Australia, aged 18 years or older, and at high risk of skin cancer. Participants randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 98) completed a self-administered questionnaire on mobile teledermoscopy acceptance for skin cancer detection both before use and after performing mobile teledermoscopy-enhanced SSE in their homes. The survey included a 25-item scale assessing seven TAM domains. Item scores ranged from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). Participants also answered survey questions on satisfaction with use of teledermoscopy, and a 9-item "thoughts about melanoma" scale that measures cancer worry. RESULTS:Participants were 19-73 years old, had high skin cancer risk, blue or grey eyes (53.1%), fair or very fair skin (88.8%), and previous skin cancer treatments (61.2%). Participants were more accepting of mobile teledermoscopy at baseline: mean TAM score of 4.15 (SE 0.05); their level of acceptance decreased significantly after teledermoscopy use: mean score 3.94 (SE 0.05; p = 0.001). In linear regression analysis, the decrease in TAM scores was similar across demographic and skin cancer risk categories. Ninety-two percent (n = 90) of participants agreed that mobile teledermoscopy was easy to use. The mean score of the "thoughts about melanoma" scale did not change significantly from baseline to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Consumers had high TAM scores before they used mobile teledermoscopy within a randomised control trial. At the end of the intervention period, TAM scores decreased, although participants' average score still indicated "agreement" that mobile teledermoscopy was acceptable.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Previous cross-sectional research indicates high acceptance of mobile teledermoscopy-enhanced skin self-examination (SSE) by consumers based on the technology acceptance model (TAM) domains: perceived usefulness, ease of use, compatibility, attitude and intention, subjective norms, facilitator, and trust. However, no study has assessed this outcome longitudinally among people who actually used the technology in their own homes. METHODS:Participants were living in Brisbane, Australia, aged 18 years or older, and at high risk of skin cancer. Participants randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 98) completed a self-administered questionnaire on mobile teledermoscopy acceptance for skin cancer detection both before use and after performing mobile teledermoscopy-enhanced SSE in their homes. The survey included a 25-item scale assessing seven TAM domains. Item scores ranged from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). Participants also answered survey questions on satisfaction with use of teledermoscopy, and a 9-item "thoughts about melanoma" scale that measures cancer worry. RESULTS:Participants were 19-73 years old, had high skin cancer risk, blue or grey eyes (53.1%), fair or very fair skin (88.8%), and previous skin cancer treatments (61.2%). Participants were more accepting of mobile teledermoscopy at baseline: mean TAM score of 4.15 (SE 0.05); their level of acceptance decreased significantly after teledermoscopy use: mean score 3.94 (SE 0.05; p = 0.001). In linear regression analysis, the decrease in TAM scores was similar across demographic and skin cancer risk categories. Ninety-two percent (n = 90) of participants agreed that mobile teledermoscopy was easy to use. The mean score of the "thoughts about melanoma" scale did not change significantly from baseline to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Consumers had high TAM scores before they used mobile teledermoscopy within a randomised control trial. At the end of the intervention period, TAM scores decreased, although participants' average score still indicated "agreement" that mobile teledermoscopy was acceptable.
Authors: Lucy J van Hensbergen; Inge J Veldhuizen; Erica H Lee; Saskia Houterman; Tjinta Brinkhuizen; René R W J van der Hulst; Maarten M Hoogbergen Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2021-09-14 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Dorra Bouazzi; Anette Bygum; Lone Skov; Mikkel Lindskov Sachs; Lars Iversen; Merete Hædersdal; Gregor B E Jemec; Simon F Thomsen Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2021-05-25 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Katie J Lee; Brigid Betz-Stablein; Mitchell S Stark; Monika Janda; Aideen M McInerney-Leo; Liam J Caffery; Nicole Gillespie; Tatiane Yanes; H Peter Soyer Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-01-17