Exploring underutilization of videophones in hospice settings

Telemedicine and e-Health

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 25-31

  Day, Michele ^a   Demiris, George ^b,c   Oliver, Debra Parker ^a   Courtney, Karen ^b   Hensel, Brian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b University of Missouri   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; TELEMEDICINE; TELEPHONE;

CONTENT ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL (TAM);

VIDEO TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT;

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CAREGIVER; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPICE; HOSPICE CARE; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; TECHNOLOGY; TELEHEALTH; VIDEOCONFERENCING;

EID: 33947250916     PISSN: 15305627     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2006.0023     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Whitten P, Doolittle G, Mackert M. Providers' acceptance of telehospice. J Palliat Med 2005;8:730-735.
2. Regnard C. Using videoconferencing in palliative care. Palliat Med 2000;14:519-528.
3. Bashshur R, Lathan C. Human factors in telemedicine. Telemed J 1999;5:127-128.
4. Parker Oliver D, Demiris G. An assessment of the readiness of hospice organizations to accept technological innovation. J Telemed Telecare 2004;10:170-174.
5. Whitten P, Doolittle G, Mackert M. Telehospice in Michigan: Use and patient acceptance. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 2004;21:191-195.
6. Doolittle G, Yaezel A, Otto F, Clemens C. Hospice care using home-based telemedicine systems. J Telemed Telecare 1998;4:58-59.
7. Parker Oliver D, Demiris G, Porock D. The usability of videophones for seniors and hospice providers: A brief report of two studies. Comput Biol Med 2005;35:782-790.
8. Demiris G, Parker Oliver D, Fleming D, Edison K. Hospice staff attitudes towards telehospice. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 2004;21:343-347.
9. Williams J, Bassett M. Telemanagement in hospice-a new frontier. Caring 2006;25:22-24.
10. Parker Oliver D, Demiris G, Day M, Courtney K, Porock D. Tele-hospice support for elder caregivers of hospice patients: Two case studies. J Palliat Med 2006;9:264-267.
11. Cook DJ, Doolittle GC, Whitten P. Administrator and provider perceptions of the factors relating to programme effectiveness in implementing telemedicine to provide end-of-life care. J Telemed Telecare 2001;7: 17-19.
12. Davis FD. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results [doctoral dissertation]. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, MA: 1986.
13. Davis F. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 1989;13:319-340.
14. Al-Gahtani S, King M. Attitudes, satisfaction and usage: Factors contributing to each in the acceptance of information technology. Behav Inf Technol 1999;18: 277-297.
15. Hu P, Chau P, Sheng O, Tam K. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J Manage Inform Syst 1999;16:91-119.
16. Yang H, Yoo Y. It's all about attitude: Revisiting the technology acceptance model. Decis Support Syst 2004;38:19-31.
17. Whitten P, Mackert M. Addressing telehealth's foremost barrier: provider as initial gatekeeper. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005;21:517-521.
18. Venkatesh V, Morris M, Davis G, Davis F. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q 2003;27:425-475.
19. Demiris G, Parker Oliver DR, Porock D, Courtney K. The Missouri telehospice project: background and next steps. Home Health Care Technol Rep 2004;1:49-55.