An exploratory study of the personal health records adoption model in the older adult with chronic illness

Informatics in Primary Care

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 151-169

  Logue, Melanie D ^a   Effken, Judith A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Chronic illness; Older adults; Personal health records; Self management; Theoretical framework

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CHRONIC DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; PILOT STUDY; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RISK FACTOR; SELF CONCEPT; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARIZONA; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CHRONIC DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HEALTH RECORDS, PERSONAL; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MOTIVATION; PILOT PROJECTS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK FACTORS; SELF EFFICACY; UTAH;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84880071532     PISSN: 14760320     EISSN: 14759985     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14236/jhi.v20i3.21     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. World Health Organization. Chronic Diseases and Health Promotion. Preventing Chronic Disease: a vital investment. 2008. www.who.int/chp/chronic- disease-report/part1/en/index.html (accessed 12/09/08).
2. Association of Retired Persons International. Global Focus on Personal Health Records. 2007. www.aarpinternational.org/gra-sub/gra-sub-show.htm?doc-id= 541055 (accessed 06/01/12).
3. Health Consumer Powerhouse. The Empowerment of the European Patient 2009 - options and implications. www.healthpowerhouse.com/files/EPEI-2009/ europeanpatient-empowerment-2009-report.pdf (accessed 02/07/12).
4. Healthcare Information Management and Systems Society. HIMSS Personal Health Records Definition and Position Statement. 2007. www.himss.org/content/ files/phrdefinition071707.pdf (accessed 12/03/11).
5. California Healthcare Foundation. Consumers and Health Information Technology: a national survey. 2010. www.chcf.org/-/media/Files/PDF/C/ ConsumersHealthInfoTechnologyNationalSurvey.pdf (accessed 03/05/10).
6. Markle Foundation. Americans overwhelmingly believe electronic personal health records could improve their health. Connecting for Health. 2008. www.connectingforhealth.com/resources/ResearchBrief-200806.pdf (accessed 18/04/09).
7. Kaelber D, Jha A, JohnstonDet al. A research agenda for personal health records (PHRs). Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2008;15:729-36.
8. Winkelman WJ, Leonard KJ and Rossos PG. Patientperceived usefulness of online electronic medical records: employing grounded theory in the development of information and communication technologies for use by patients living with chronic illness. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2005;12:306-14.
9. Wagner EH, Austin BT, DavisCet al. Improving chronic illness care: translating evidence into action. Health Affairs 2001;20(6):64-78.
10. Bodenheimer T. Interventions to improve chronic illness care: evaluating their effectiveness. Disease Management 2003;6:63-71.
11. Green C, Fortin P, MaclureMet al. Information system support as a critical success factor for chronic disease management: necessary but not sufficient. International Journal of Medical Informatics 2006;75:818-28.
12. Marchibroda J. The impact of health information technology on collaborative chronic care management. Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy 2008;14(2):S3-11.
13. American Health Quality Foundation. Quality Improvement Organizations and Health Information Exchange. American Health Quality Foundation: Washington, DC, 2006.
14. Chun-Song H. RT-ABCDE strategy for management and prevention of human diseases. Chinese Journal of Integrated Medicine 2008;14:147-50.
15. Logue MD and Effken JA. Modeling factors that influence personal health records adoption. Computers, Informatics Nursing 2012:30:354-62.
16. Logue MD and Effken JA. Validating the Personal Health Records Adoption Model using a modified e- Delphi. Journal of Advanced Nursing.
17. Bandura A. Principles of Behavior Modification. Holt, Rinehart & Winston: New York, 1969.
18. Medicare launches Medicare PHR choice pilot-offers beneficiaries an opportunity to maintain their own personal health records. Medical News Today. 2009. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/135323.php (accessed 21/04/10).
19. Medicare.gov. Personal Health Records. www.medicare. gov/ (S(rys1wqms3zses3450t3e3v55))/navigation/manageyourhealth/personal-health- records/personal-healthrecords- overview.aspx (accessed 21/04/10).
20. United States Census Bureau. Arizona Quick Facts. quickfacts.census.gov/ qfd/states/04000.html (accessed 21/04/10).
21. Smith DI and Spraggins RE. Gender in the United States. www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/people/a-gender.html. 2009 (accessed 21/04/10).
22. Howell DC. Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (6e). Thomson Wadsworth: Belmont, CA, 2008.
23. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A et al. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavioral Research Methods 2007; 39:175-91.
24. Norman C and Skinner H. eHEALS: the e-Health Literacy Scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2006;8(4):e27. www.jmir.org/2006/4/e27 (accessed 15/11/08).
25. Schwarzer R and Jerusalem M. Generalized self-efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S and Johnston M (eds) Measures in Health Psychology: a user's portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. NFER-NELSON: Windsor, 1995; pp. 35-7.
26. Smith B, Caputi P and Rawstorne P. The development of a measure of subjective computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior 2007;23:127-45.
27. Hung ML, Chou C, Chen CH et al. Learner readiness for online learning: scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education 2010;55:1080-90.
28. Hertzog M. Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing & Health 2008; 31:190-1.
29. Nunnally JC and Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1994.
30. Tienda M and Mitchell F (eds) Committee on Transforming Our Common Destiny, National Research Council. Hispanics and the Future of America. National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2006.
31. Pennington RR, Kelton AS and DeVries DD. The effects of qualitative overload on technology acceptance. Journal of Information Systems 2006;20:25-36.
32. Bedard JC, Jackson C, Ettredge ML et al. The effect of training on auditors' acceptance of an electronic work system. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 2003;4:227-50.
33. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB et al. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 2003;27(3):425-78.
34. Chau PYK and Hu PJ. Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: an exploratory study. Journal of Management Information Systems 2002;18(4):191-229.
35. Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations (5e). Free Press: New York, 1995.
36. Becker MH. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Education Quarterly 1974;2(4).
37. Montano D and Kasprzyk D. Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In: Glanz K, Rimer B and Viswanath K (eds) Health Behavior and Health Education: theory, research, and practice (4e). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, 2008; pp. 67-96.
38. Triandis H. Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. In: Howe H and Page M (eds) Nebraska Symposium of Motivation 1979. University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln, NE, 1980; pp. 195-259.
39. Rogers EM and Scott K. The Diffusion of Innovations Model and Outreach from the National Network of Libraries of Medicine to Native American Communities. National. Network of Libraries of Medicine. 1997. nnlm.gov/pnr/eval/rogers.html (accessed 05/03/10).
40. Sasmor J. Perception May be Reality: volume one. Jett: Sedona, AZ, 2001.
41. Ruland CM, Jeneson A, Andersen T et al. Designing tailored Internet support to assist cancer patients in illness management. AMIA 2007 Symposium Proceedings, pp. 635-9.
42. Ryan P, Pumilia N, Nehak B et al. Development and performance usability testing of a theory-based com puterized, tailored intervention. Computers, Informatics Nursing 2009;27:288-98.
43. Benbassat J, PilpelDand Tidhar M. Patients' preferences for participation in clinical decision making: a review of published surveys. Behavior Medicine 1998;24(2):81-8.
44. Markle Foundation. Connecting for Health: a public private collaborative. The Personal Health Working Group, Final Report, 2003.
45. Holland M. Electronic Personal Health Records: a survey of consumer attitudes and usage. Health Industry Insights (HI201461). 2006. www.healthindustry-insights.com (accessed 23/07/09).
46. Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. Deloitte Survey Finds Healthy Consumer Demand for Electronic Health Records, Online Tools and Services. Privacy and security of personal health information still major concern. 2009. www.deloitte.com/dtt/press-release/0,1014,sid%253D2283%2526cid%253D256809,00. html (accessed 20/07/09).
47. Hassol A, Walker J, Kidder S et al. Patient experiences and attitudes about access to a patient electronic health care record and linked web messaging. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2004;11:505-13.
48. Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E et al. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, GriffinDand KahemanD(eds) Heuristics and Biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press: New York, 2002; pp. 397- 420.
49. Trochim WM and Donnelly JP. The Research Methods Knowledge Base (3e). Cengage Learning: Mason, OH, 2008.
50. Schwarz N and Oyserman D. Asking questions about behavior: cognition, communication, and questionnaire construction. American Journal of Evaluation 2001; 22:127-60.
51. Fowler FJ. Survey Research Methods (3e). Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 1. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, 2002.
52. Stone AA and Shiffman S. Capturing momentary, selfreport data: a proposal for reporting guidelines. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2002;24:236-43.