User acceptance of health telematics applications;Akzeptanz der Gesundheitstelematik bei ihren Anwendern

Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz

Volumn 48, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 778-788

  Schmidt, S ^a   Koch, U ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acceptance (patient and provider acceptance); Evaluation; Health service research; Health telematics; Health telemedicine

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER NETWORK; COMPUTER SECURITY; GERMANY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTEGRATED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; MANAGEMENT; MEDICAL RECORD; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; TELECOMMUNICATION; TELEMEDICINE;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; COMPUTER COMMUNICATION NETWORKS; COMPUTER SECURITY; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE, INTEGRATED; GERMANY; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; TELECOMMUNICATIONS; TELEMEDICINE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 22344439809     PISSN: 14369990     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00103-005-1083-9     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Mandl KD, Lee TH (2002) Integrating medical informatics and health service research. The need for dual training at the clinical health system and policy levels. J Am Med Informatics Association 9(2):127-132
2. Chambers MG, Connor SL, McGonigle M, Diver MG (2003) Multimedia software to help caregivers cope. J Amn Med Informatics Association 10(5):504-510
3. Sheybani E, Sankar R (2002) ATMTN: A Telemammography Network Architecture. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 49(12):1438-1443
4. Jaatinen PT, Forsström J, Loula P (2002) Teleconsultations: Who uses them and how? J Telemed Telecare 8:319-324
5. Aoki N, Dunn K, Johnson-Throop KA, Turley JP (2003) Outcomes and methods in telemedicine evaluation. Telemed J e-Health 9(4):393-401
6. Schmidt S, Koch U (2003) Telemedizin aus einer medizinpsychologischen Perspektive - Die Bedeutung von Telematikanwendungen für die Arzt-Patientenbeziehung und -kommunikation. Z Med Psychol 3:67-71
7. Jäckel AH (2001) Telemedizinführer Deutschland. Medizin-Forum AG, Ober-Mörlen
8. Konferenz der für das Gesundheitswesen zuständigen Ministerinnen und Minister, Senatorinnen und Senatoren der Länder - Bericht und Beschluss zu TOP 7.2 (2002) Telematik im Gesundheitswesen. Potenziale der luK-Technologien für die Gesundheitsversorgung stärker nutzen. In: 75 Konferenz der für das Gesundheitswesen zuständigen Ministerinnen und Minister, Senatorinnen und Senatoren der Länder; Düsseldorf; 20.-21.06.2002
9. Coulter A (2003) The European patient of the future. Open University Press 9
10. Grätzel von Grätz P (2004) Vernetzte Medizin. Patientenempowerment und Netzinfrastrukturen in der Medizin des 21. Jahrhunderts, 1Aufl. Heise, Hannover
11. Miller EA (2001) Telemedicine and doctor-patient communication: An analytical survey of the literature. J Telemed Telecare 7:1-17
12. Ong LML, De Haes JCJM, Hoos AM, Lammes FB (1995) Doctor-patient communication: A review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 40:903-918
13. Miller EA (2003) The technical and interpersonal aspects of telemedicine: Effects on doctor-patient communication. J Telemed Telecare 9(1):1-7
14. Balas EA, Jaffrey F, Kuperman GJ et al. (1997) Electronic communication with patients. Evaluation of distance medicine technology. J Am Medical Association 278(2):152-159
15. Engelmann U, Ellsässer C, Schwab M et al. (2001) Evaluation des CHILI-Teleradiologienetzwerkes nach drei Jahren im klinischen Einsatz. In: Jäckel A (Hrsg) Telemedizinführer Deutschland. Deutsches Medizin Forum AG, Ober-Mörlen, S 343-345
16. Schwaab B, Katalinic A, Richardt G et al. (2003) Zur Praktikabilität und Reliabilität des selbst abgeleiteten und telefonisch übertragenen 12-Kanal-EKG. Z Kardiologie 92:31-38
17. Roine R, Ohinmaa A, Hailey D (2001) Assessing telemedicine: A systematic review of the literature. Can Medical Association J 165(6):765-771
18. Hailey D, Roine R, Ohinmaa A (2002) Systematic review of evidence for the benefits of telemedicine. J Telemed Telecare 8(1):1-7
19. Whitten PS, Mair FS, Haycox A et al. (2004) Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions. Br Medl J 324:1434-1437
20. Currell R, Urquhart C, Wainwright P, Lewis R (2001) Telemedicine versus face to face patient care: Effects of professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochra ne Re view). The Cochrane Library, 4. Update Software, Oxford
21. Hersh W, Helfand M, Wallace J et al. (2001) Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: A systematic review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1(5)
22. Hersh W, Helfand M, Wallace J et al. (2002) A systematic review of the efficacy of telemedicine for making diagnostic and management decisions. J Telemed Telecare 8(4):197-209
23. Krishna S, Balas EA, Boren SA, Maglaveras N (2002) Patient acceptance of educational voice messages: A re view of controlled clinical studies. Methods Information Med 415:360-369
24. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith KW (1999) Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: A systematic review. J Am Medical Association 280(15):1339-1346
25. Williams TL, May CR, Esmail A (2001) Limitations of patient satisfaction studies in telehealthcare: A systematic review of the literature. Telemed J e-health 7(4):293-316
26. Mair F, Whitten P (2000) Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. Br Medical J 320:1517-1520
27. Wootton R, Bloomer SE, Corbett R et al. (2000) Multicentre randomised control trial comparing real time teledermatology with conventional outpatient dermatological care: Societal cost-benefit analysis. Br Medical J 320(7244):1252-1256
28. Jacklin PB, Roberts JA, Wallace P et al. (2004) Virtual outreach: economic evaluation of joint teleconsultations for patients referred by their general practitioner for a specialist opinion. Br Medical J 327:84-91
29. Abdoh AA, Krousel-Wood MA, Re RN (2003) Accuracy of telemedicine in detecting uncontrolled hypertension and its impact on patient management. Telemed J e-health 9(4):315-323
30. Renders CM, Valk GD, Griffin SF et al. (2001) Interventions to improve the management of diabetes in primary care, outpatient, and community settings. Diabetes Care 24(10):1821-1833
31. Winkelman WJ, Leonard KJ (2004) Overcoming structural constraints to patient utilization of electronic medical records: A critical review and proposal for an evaluation framework. J Amn Medical Informatics Association 11(2):151-161
32. Warda F, Noelle G (2002) Telemedizin und eHealth in Deutschland: Materialien und Empfehlungen für eine nationale Telematikplattform, 1. Aufl. edn. Niebüll, Videel: DIMDI, Deutsches Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information
33. Schmidt S, Niemeyer A, Stettin J (2005) Gesundheitstelematik und ihre Akzeptanz bei niedergelassenen Ärzten: Eine empirische Untersuchung. Zeitschrift für Telematik
34. Grandt D (2004) Von der Nasa lernen. Proaktives Risikomanagement bei medikamentöser Therapie. Krankenhaus Umschau (KU) 7:607-610
35. Collen MF (1999) A vision of health care and informatics in 2008. J Am Medical Informatics Association 6(1):1-5
36. Schmidt S (2005a) Akzeptanz der Telematik in der medizinischen Versorung Hamburgs. Bericht über ein Gutachten (vgl. http://www.dimdi.de/ dynamic/de/ehealth/projekte/; http://telemedizin-evaluation.de)
37. Schmidt S (2005b) Evaluation der Einführung eines telemedizinischen Netzes in Hamburg. Bericht über ein Gutachten (vgl. http://www.dimdi.de/dynamic/de/ehealth/projekte/; http://telemedizinevaluation.de)