대한간호학회지 (Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing)

한국간호과학회 (Korean Society of Nursing Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

기술수용모델II에 기반한 중장년층 입원환자의 스마트모니터 기반 모바일헬스 이용 의도에 관한 경로분석

Factors Affecting the Intention to Use Smartmonitor-Based Mobile Health in Middle-Aged in Patients Applying the Technology Acceptance Model II

  • 주옳음 (부산고려병원 간호부) ;
  • 하이경 (동의대학교 간호학과.동의간호과학연구소)
  • Joo, Ol Eum (Nursing Department, Busan Korea Hospital) ;
  • Ha, Yi Kyung (Department of Nursing, Research Institute of Dong-eui Nursing Science, Dong-eui University)
  • 투고 : 2024.08.02
  • 심사 : 2024.10.21
  • 발행 : 2024.11.29
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: This study aimed to identify factors that influence the intention to use smart monitor-based mobile health (SBM) technology among middle-aged inpatients, based on the technology acceptance model II (TAM II). Methods: A total of 222 participants were surveyed. Data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 23.0 and IBM SPSS Amos 23. Seven exogenous variables-social influence (SI), personal self-efficacy, (PSE), environmental self-efficacy (ESE), health literacy, health concerns, resistance to innovative technology (RIT), accessibility (AC)- and three endogenous variables-perceived ease of use (PEOU), perceived usability (PU), and intention to use (ITU)-were investigated. Results: The hypothesized path model demonstrated a good fit for the data. SI (β = .13, p = .042), PU (β = .46, p < .001), and PEOU (β = .16, p = .008) had significant direct effects on the ITU, which explained 39.5% of the variance. Additionally, SI (β = .27, p < .001), ESE (β = .16, p = .010), RIT (β = - .12, p = .026), AC (β = .28, p < .001), and PEOU (β = .20, p = .001) indirectly affected ITU through PU, which explained 50.7% of the variance. Furthermore, PSE (β = .38, p < .001) indirectly influenced ITU via PEOU, which explained 38.4% of the variance. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the TAM II can be used to effectively predict ITU in SBMs among middle-aged inpatients. To expand the intention to use SBMs, it is necessary to develop SBMs that include content and programs that promote PU, SI, and PEOU.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. David Niewolny. What is a smart hospital? [Internet]. NVIDIA; c2022 [cited 2023 Apr 1]. Available from: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/what-is-a-smart-hospital/.
  2. Kwon H, An S, Lee HY, Cha WC, Kim S, Cho M, et al. Review of smart hospital services in real healthcare environments. Healthcare Informatics Research. 2022;28(1):3-15. https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2022.28.1.3
  3. Rajaei O, Khayami SR, Rezaei MS. Smart hospital definition: Academic and industrial perspective. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2024;182:105304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105304
  4. Kim E, Han S. Investigating the digital health acceptance of Korean baby boomers: Comparative study of telemedicine and wearable healthcare devices. Health Policy and Technology. 2023;12(1):100727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100727
  5. Aldekhyyel RN, Bakker CJ, Pitt MB, Melton GB. The impact of patient interactive systems on the management of pain in an inpatient hospital setting: A systematic review. Applied Clinical Informatics. 2019;10(4):580-596. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1694002
  6. Putranto D, Rochmawati E. Mobile applications for managing symptoms of patients with cancer at home: A scoping review. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 2020;26(4):e12842. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12842
  7. Rao-Gupta S, Kruger D, Leak LD, Tieman LA, Manworren RCB. Leveraging interactive patient care technology to improve pain management engagement. Pain Management Nursing. 2018;19(3):212-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.002
  8. Tang C, Lorenzi N, Harle CA, Zhou X, Chen Y. Interactive systems for patient-centered care to enhance patient engagement. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2016;23(1):2-4. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv198
  9. Fernandez-Luque L, Karlsen R, Melton GB. HealthTrust: A social network approach for retrieving online health videos. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2012;14(1):e22. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1985
  10. Liszka HA, Steyer TE, Hueston WJ. Virtual medical care: How are our patients using online health information? Journal of Community Health. 2006;31(5):368-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-006-9019-3
  11. Fox MP. A systematic review of the literature reporting on studies that examined the impact of interactive, computer-based patient education programs. Patient Education and Counseling. 2009;77(1):6-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.02.011
  12. Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI). Research on smart hospital development plans to innovate medical services in the digital era [Internet]. KHIDI; c2021 [cited 2023 Apr 1]. Available from: https://www.khidi.or.kr/board/view?linkId=48855072&menuId=MENU00085.
  13. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science. 2000;46(2):186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
  14. Koehler MJ, Mishra P, Kereluik K, Shin TS, Graham CR. The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In: Spector J, Merrill M, Elen J, Bishop M, editors. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer; 2013. p. 101-111.
  15. Shin HR, Kim SK, Kim YS. Effect of self-efficacy of middle-aged and elderly on the intention to use digital health devices: Focusing on the difference between middle-aged and elderly. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2020;18(10):13-22. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2020.18.10.013
  16. Lee J, Tak SH. Factors associated with eHealth literacy focusing on digital literacy components: A cross-sectional study of middle-aged adults in South Korea. Digital Health. 2022;8:20552076221102765. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076221102765
  17. Alruwaili MM, Shaban M, Elsayed Ramadan OM. Digital health interventions for promoting healthy aging: A systematic review of adoption patterns, efficacy, and user experience. Sustainability. 2023;15(23):16503. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316503
  18. Korean Statistical Information Service (KOSIS). Sociodemographics by life stage [Internet]. KOSIS; c2022 [cited 2023 Apr 1]. Available from: https://kostat.go.kr/statDesc.es?act=view&mid=a10501010000&sttr_cd=S004008.
  19. Kwon KD. A survey on the public awareness of digital healthcare. Journal of Digital Contents Society. 2022;23(3):551-558. https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2022.23.3.551
  20. AlQudah AA, Al-Emran M, Shaalan K. Technology acceptance in healthcare: A systematic review. Applied Sciences. 2021;11(22):10537. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210537
  21. Rahimi B, Nadri H, Lotfnezhad Afshar H, Timpka T. A systematic review of the technology acceptance model in health informatics. Applied Clinical Informatics. 2018;9(3):604-634. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1668091
  22. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991;50(2):179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
  23. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13(3):319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  24. Taylor S, Todd PA. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research. 1995;6(2):144-176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144
  25. Koo JH, Jin KN. A study on the acceptance of telehealth services in 50-60s. Health and Social Welfare Review. 2021;41(1):265-282. https://doi.org/10.15709/hswr.2021.41.1.265
  26. Kim SS, Ryu S. Structural relationships among factors to adoption of telehealth service. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems. 2011;21(3):71-96.
  27. Lee LS, Lee SH, Jeong JS, Noh KY. Psychological factors influencing continuous use of mobile healthcare applications. Journal of Digital Convergence. 2017;15(7):445-456. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2017.15.7.445
  28. Jeong HK, Lee HJ, Lee JS. Acceptance intention of healthcare application by middle and elderly based on the technology readiness 2.0 and acceptance model. Korean Journal of Sport Management. 2021;26(1):108-123. https://doi.org/10.31308/KSSM.26.1.108
  29. Kim YW, Han S, Kim KS. Determinants of intention to use digital healthcare service of middle and older users. Information Society & Media. 2018;19(3):1-23. https://doi.org/10.52558/ISM.2018.12.19.3.1
  30. Hong M, Kang S, Yoo SC. Factors influencing the adoption of smart hospital healthcare services: An online survey of Chinese consumers. Health Service Management Review. 2022;16(1):49-61. https://doi.org/10.18014/hsmr.2022.16.1.49
  31. Li J, Ma Q, Chan AH, Man SS. Health monitoring through wearable technologies for older adults: Smart wearables acceptance model. Applied Ergonomics. 2019;75:162-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.006
  32. Cimperman M, Makovec Brenčič M, Trkman P. Analyzing older users' home telehealth services acceptance behavior-applying an Extended UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2016;90:22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.03.002
  33. Bea YI, Shin HR. A study on the consumer acceptance of digital healthcare service using technology acceptance model (TAM): Focusing on healthcare app users. GRI Review. 2020;22(2):99-128. https://doi.org/10.23286/gri.2020.22.2.005
  34. Noh GY, Choi J, Kwon MS. A test of extended technology acceptance model on health information seeking on the internet. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies. 2013;27(5):49-85.
  35. Jin S. A study of factors affecting use intention of untact medical diagnosis and consultation services. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association. 2020;20(12):180-197. https://doi.org/10.5392/jkca.2020.20.12.180
  36. Woo JP. Concepts and understanding of structural equation model: Amos 4.0~20.0. Hannarae Publishing; 2012. p. 1-568.
  37. Jang AY, Park JS. Factors influencing quality of life of cancer patients hospitalized in long-term care hospitals. Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing. 2018;20(1):35-44. https://doi.org/10.17079/jkgn.2018.20.1.35
  38. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 1977;84(2):191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191
  39. Chen K, Chan AH. Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: A senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics. 2014;57(5):635-652. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.895855
  40. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHEALS: The eHealth literacy scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2006;8(4):e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27
  41. Chung S, Park BK, Nahm ES. The Korean eHealth Literacy Scale (K-eHEALS): Reliability and validity testing in younger adults recruited online. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2018;20(4):e138. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8759
  42. Kim J, Park HA. Development of a health information technology acceptance model using consumers' health behavior intention. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2012;14(5):e133. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2143
  43. Ahadzadeh AS, Pahlevan Sharif S, Ong FS, Khong KW. Integrating health belief model and technology acceptance model: An investigation of health-related internet use. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2015;17(2):e45. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3564
  44. Rho MJ. A study of the expected benefit and perceived risk on telemedicine acceptance for hypertension management. Journal of International Trade & Commerce. 2013;9(1):343-361. https://doi.org/10.16980/jitc.9.1.201303.343
  45. Cho DY. A study on the factors of preventive health recognition affecting the intention to continuous use of mobile healthcare service [dissertation]. Seoul: Soongsil University; 2020. p. 1-111.
  46. Ko DS. Elderly's intention to use wearable device: Application of technology acceptance model. Journal of Sport for All. 2019;78:347-360. https://doi.org/10.51979/KSSLS.2019.10.78.347
  47. Kim H, Goldsmith JV, Sengupta S, Mahmood A, Powell MP, Bhatt J, et al. Mobile health application and e-Health literacy: Opportunities and concerns for cancer patients and caregivers. Journal of Cancer Education. 2019;34(1):3-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-017-1293-5
  48. Lin YH, Lou MF. Effects of mHealth-based interventions on health literacy and related factors: A systematic review. Journal of Nursing Management. 2021;29(3):385-394. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13175
  49. Emerson MR, Buckland S, Lawlor MA, Dinkel D, Johnson DJ, Mickles MS, et al. Addressing and evaluating health literacy in mHealth: A scoping review. mHealth. 2022;8:33. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-11
  50. Kim HJ, Rha JY. Consumer resistance to smartwatches: Gender and age differences. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association. 2017;17(12):447-460. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2017.17.12.447