Modeling the acceptance of clinical information systems among hospital medical staff: An extended TAM model

Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 553-564

  Melas, Christos D ^a   Zampetakis, Leonidas A ^b   Dimopoulou, Anastasia ^c   Moustakis, Vassilis ^b  

^a TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CRETE   (Greece)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF CRETE   (Greece)

^c IASO GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Greece)

Author keywords

Computer use; Greece; Hospital; Structural equation modeling; Technology Acceptance Model

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; COMPUTER USE; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; GREECE; INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES; MEDICAL SPECIALTIES; RANDOM SAMPLE; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; TAM MODEL; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL;

HOSPITALS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MODERATORS; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY;

INFORMATION USE;

ARTICLE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION STORAGE; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MEDICAL STAFF; NURSE; PHARMACIST; PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT; PHYSIOTHERAPIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; RESCUE PERSONNEL; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL STAFF, HOSPITAL; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; NURSING STAFF, HOSPITAL; RESEARCH DESIGN; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 79960566235     PISSN: 15320464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.01.009     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 1989, 3(3):319-340.
2. Schepers J., Wetzels M. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Info Manage 2007, 44:90-103.
3. Yousafzai S.Y., Foxall G.R., Pallister J.G. Technology acceptance: a meta-analysis of the TAM: part 1. J Model Manage 2007, 2(3):251-280.
4. Yarbrough A.K., Smith T.B. Technology acceptance among physicians: a new take on TAM. Med Care Res Rev 2007, 64(6):650-672.
5. Bhattacherjee A., Hikmet N. Physicians' resistance toward health care information technology: a theoretical model and empirical test. Eur J Info Syst 2007, 16:725-737.
6. Holden R.J., Karsh B.T. The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform 2010, 43(1):159-172.
7. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. J Appl Soc Psychol 1992, 22(1):1111-1132.
8. Paré G., Sicotte C., Jacques H. The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians' acceptance of clinical information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006, 13:197-205.
9. Cork R.D., Detmer W.M., Friedman C.P. Development and initial validation of an instrument to measure physicians' use of, knowledge about, and attitudes toward computers. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998, 5(2):164-176.
10. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 2000, 46:186-204.
11. Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., Davis F.D. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 2003, 27:425-478.
12. Hu P., Chau P., Sheng O., Tam K. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J Manage Info Syst 1999, 16(2):91-113.
13. Barker D.J., van Schaik P., Simpson D.S., Corbett W.A. Evaluating a spoken dialogue system for recording clinical observations during an endoscopic examination. Med Inform Internet Med 2003, 28:85-97.
14. Liu L., Ma Q. Perceived system performance: a test of an extended technology acceptance model. Database Adv Inform Syst 2006, 37:51-59.
15. Liang H., Xue Y., Byrd T.A. PDA usage in health care professionals: testing an extended technology acceptance model. Int J Mobile Commun 2003, 1:372-389.
16. Horan TA, Tulu B, Hilton B, Burton J. Use of online systems in clinical medical assessments: an analysis of physician acceptance of online disability evaluation systems. In: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciences; 2004.
17. Tung F.C., Chang S.C., Chou C.M. An extension of trust and TAM model with IDT in the adoption of the electronic logistics information system in HIS in the medical industry. Int J Med Inform 2008, 77:324-335.
18. Wu J.H., Wang S.C., Lin L.M. Mobile computing acceptance factors in the health care industry: a structural equation model. Int J Med Inform 2007, 76:66-77.
19. Deng X., Doll W.J., Hendrickson A., Scazzero J.A. A multi-group analysis of structural invariance: an illustration using the technology acceptance model. Info Manage 2005, 42:745-759.
20. Doll W.J., Hendrickson A., Deng X. Using Davis's perceived usefulness and ease-of-use instruments for decision making: a confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis. Decis Sci 1998, 29(4):839-869.
21. Frazier P.A., Tix A.P., Barron K.E. Testing moderator and mediator effects in counselling psychology research. J Couns Psychol 2004, 51(1):115-134.
22. Byrne B.M. Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS graphics: a road less traveled. Struct Equation Model: A Multidiscip J 2004, 11(2):272-300.
23. Little T.D. Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: practical and theoretical issues. Multivar Behav Res 1997, 32:53-76.
24. Brislin R.W. Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. Handbook of cross cultural psychology 1981, 398-444. Allyn & Bacon, Boston. H.C. Triandis, J.W. Berry (Eds.).
25. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2007, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles (CA). 4th ed.
26. Flora D.B., Curran P.J. An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychol Methods 2004, 9(4):466-491.
27. West S.G., Finch J.F., Curran P.J. Structural equation models with non normal data variables: problems and remedies. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications 1995, 56-75. Sage, London. R.H. Hoyle (Ed.).
28. Arbuckle J.L. AMOS 7.0. User guide 2006, SmallWaters Corporation, Chicago.
29. Anderson J.C., Gerbing D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 1988, 103:411-423.
30. Fornell C., Larcker D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 1981, 18(2):39-50.
31. Shook C.L., Ketchen D.J., Hult G.T.M., Kacmar K.M. An assessment of the use of structural equation models in strategic management research. Strateg Manage J 2004, 25:397-404.
32. Raftery A.E. Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. Testing structural equation models 1993, 163-180. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (CA). K.A. Bollen, J.S. Long (Eds.).
33. Zampetakis L.A., Moustakis V. Quantifying uncertainty in ranking problems with composite indicators: a Bayesian approach. J Model Manage 2010, 5(1):63-80.
34. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. Multimodel inference: understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol Methods Res 2004, 33(2):261-304.
35. Shrout P.E., Bolger N. Mediation in experimental and non-experimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychol Methods 2002, 4:422-445.
36. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.Y., Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 2003, 88(5):879-903.
37. Cheung G.W., Rensvold R.B. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indices for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equation Model: A Multidiscip J 2002, 9:233-255.
38. Grewal R., Cote J.A., Baumgartner H. Multicollinearity and measurement error in structural equation models: implications for theory testing. Mark Sci 2004, 23(4):519-529.
39. Chau P.K., Hu P.J. Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: and exploratory study. J Manage Info Syst 2002, 18(4):191-229.