Modeling factors explaining the acceptance, actual use and satisfaction of nurses using an Electronic Patient Record in acute care settings: An extension of the UTAUT

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 84, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 36-47

  Maillet, Éric ^a   Mathieu, Luc ^b   Sicotte, Claude ^c  

^a CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHERBROOKE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Acceptance; Compatibility; Information technology; Nurses; Satisfaction; Structural equation modeling; System use

Indexed keywords

NURSING;

ACCEPTANCE; COMPATIBILITY; SATISFACTION; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; SYSTEM USE;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY;

ACUTE DISEASE; ADULT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NURSE; PATIENT CARE; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SATISFACTION; STANDARDS; UTILIZATION;

ACUTE DISEASE; ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NURSES; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; PERSONAL SATISFACTION; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84914708370     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: 18728243     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.09.004     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Agarwal R., Gao G., DesRoches C., Jha A.K. Research commentary - the digital transformation of healthcare: current status and the road ahead. Inf. Syst. Res. 2010, 21(4):796-809.
2. Buntin M.B., Burke M.F., Hoaglin M.C., Blumenthal D. The benefits of health information technology: a review of the recent literature shows predominantly positive results. Health Aff. 2011, 30(3):464-471.
3. Callen J., Braithwaite J., Westbrook J. The importance of medical and nursing sub-cultures in the implementation of clinical information systems. Methods Inf. Med. 2009, 48(2):196-202.
4. Ping Z. The affective response model: a theoretical framework of affective concepts and their relationships in the ICT context. MIS Quart. 2013, 37(1):247-274.
5. Cornell P., Riordan M., Herrin-Griffith D. Transforming nursing workflow, part 2: the impact of technology on nurse activities. J. Nurs. Admin. 2010, 40(10):432-439.
6. While A., Dewsbury G. Nursing and information and communication technology (ICT): a discussion of trends and future directions. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2011, 48(10):1302-1310.
7. Institute of Medicine The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health 2010, 620. Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, Available from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12956.
8. Staggers N., Thompson C.B. The evolution of definitions for nursing informatics: a critical analysis and revised definition. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 2002, 9(3):255-261.
9. Goorman E., Berg M. Modelling nursing activities: electronic patient records and their discontents. Nurs. Inq. 2000, 7(1):3-9.
10. Hillestad R., Bigelow J., Bower A., Girosi F., Meili R., Scoville R., et al. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings and costs. Health Aff. 2005, 24(5):1103-1117.
11. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage. Sci. 1989, 35(8):982-1003.
12. Thomson Reuters, Science Watch 2009 2013-07-09. Available from: . http://archive.sciencewatch.com/dr/tt/2009/09-augtt-ECO/.
13. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research 1975, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
14. Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Gordon B.D., Davis F.D. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 2003, 27(3):425-478.
15. 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.
16. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage. Sci. 2000, 46(2):186-204.
17. Han S., Mustonen P., Seppänen M., Kallio M. Does Fragmentation of Working Time and Working Space Influence the Acceptance of Mobile Technology? A Case of Finnish Physicians 2005, Turku Centre for Computer Science.
18. Paré G., Sicotte C., Jacques H. The effects of creating psychological ownership on physicians' acceptance of clinical information systems. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 2006, 13(2):197-205.
19. Issues in predicting and explaining usage behaviors with the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behavior when usage is mandatory. Proceedings of the Twenty First International Conference on Information systems, Association for Information Systems Atlanta, GA, USA 2000, Association for Information Systems. P. Rawstorne, R. Jayasuriya, P. Caputi (Eds.).
20. Pynoo B., Devolder P., Duyck W., van Braak J., Sijnave B., Duyck P. Do hospital physicians' attitudes change during PACS implementation? A cross-sectional acceptance study. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2012, 81(2):88-97.
21. Doll W.J., Torkzadeh G. Developing a multidimensional measure of system-use in an organizational context. Inf. Manage. 1998, 33(4):171-185.
22. Ahmad H., Basden A. Non-discretionary use of information system and the technology acceptance model. Annual IRIS Conference 2008, University of Salford, Salford.
23. Abdrbo A.A., Hudak C.A., Anthony M.K., Douglas S.L. Moderating and mediating roles of nurses' beliefs. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2009, 31(1):110-127.
24. Aggelidis V.P., Chatzoglou P.D. Using a modified technology acceptance model in hospitals. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2009, 78(2):115-126.
25. Kowitlawakul Y. The technology acceptance model: predicting nurses' intention to use telemedicine technology (eICU). Comput. Inf. Nurs. 2011, 29(7):411-418. 10.1097/NCN.0b013ef9dd31814a.
26. Melas C.D., Zampetakis L.A., Dimopoulou A., Moustakis V. Modeling the acceptance of clinical information systems among hospital medical staff: an extended TAM model. J. Biomed. Inf. 2011, 44(4):553-564.
27. Morton M.E., Wiedenbeck S. A framework for predicting EHR adoption attitudes: a physician survey. Perspect. Health Inf. Manage./Am Health Inf. Manage. Assoc. 2009, 6(Fall):1-19.
28. Schaper L.K., Pervan G.P. ICT and OTs: a model of information and communication technology acceptance and utilisation by occupational therapists. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2007, 76(Suppl. 10):S212-S221.
29. Chau P.Y.K., Hu P.J.-H. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: a model comparison approach. Decis. Sci. 2001, 32(4):699-719.
30. Chau P.Y.K., Hu P.J. Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: an exploratory study. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 2002, 18(4):191-229.
31. Chau P.Y.K., Hu P.J.-H. Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 2002, 39(4):297-311.
32. Bhattacherjee A. Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quart. 2001, 25(3):351-370.
33. 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. Inf. 2008, 77(5):324-335.
34. Wu J.-H., Wang S.-C., Lin L.-M. Mobile computing acceptance factors in the healthcare industry: a structural equation model. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2007, 76(1):66-77.
35. Hsiao J.-L., Chang H.-C., Chen R.-F. A study of factors affecting acceptance of hospital information systems: a nursing perspective. J. Nurs. Res. 2011, 19(2):150-160. 10.1097/JNR.0b013e31821bb25.
36. Use of online systems in clinical medical assessments: an analysis of physician acceptance of online disability evaluation systems. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 5-8 January 2004 2004, T.A. Horan, B. Tulu, B. Hilton, J. Burton (Eds.).
37. Karahanna E., Agarwal R., Angst C.M. Reconceptualizing compatability beliefs in technology acceptance research. MIS Quart. 2006, 30(4):781-804.
38. Sun P.-C., Tsai R.J., Finger G., Chen Y.-Y., Yeh D. What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comput. Educ. 2008, 50(4):1183-1202.
39. Judge T.A., Bono J.E. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits - self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability - with job satisfaction and job performance: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86(1):80-92.
40. Healthcare Information Management Systems Society - HIMSS Electronic Medical Record Adoption Model (EMRAM) 2008, Available from: http://www.himssanalytics.org/emram/emram.aspx (accessed 18.08.10).
41. Brown S.A., Massey A.P., Montoya-Weiss M.M., Burkman J.R. Do I really have to? User acceptance of mandated technology. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2002, 11(4):283-295.
42. Compeau D.R., Higgins C.A. Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quart. 1995, 19(2):189-211.
43. Petter S., DeLone W., McLean E. Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2008, 17(3):236-263.
44. Petter S., McLean E.R. A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: an examination of IS success at the individual level. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 2009, 46(3):159-166.
45. DeLone W.H., McLean E.R. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 2003, 19(4):9-30.
46. DeLone W.H., McLean E.R. Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 1992, 3(1):60-95.
47. Lin C., Lin I.C., Roan J. Barriers to physicians' adoption of healthcare information technology: an empirical study on multiple hospitals. J. Med. Syst. 2012, 36(3):1965-1977.
48. Pai F.-Y., Huang K.-I. Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of healthcare information systems. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2011, 78(4):650-660.
49. Walter Z., Lopez M.S. Physician acceptance of information technologies: role of perceived threat to professional autonomy. Decis. Support Syst. 2008, 46(1):206-215.
50. Wills M.J., El-Gayar O., Bennett D. Examining healthcare professionals' acceptance of electronic medical records using UTAUT. Iss. Inf. Syst. 2008, 9(2):396-401.
51. Wu J.-H., Shen W.-S., Lin L.-M., Greenes R.A., Bates D.W. Testing the technology acceptance model for evaluating healthcare professionals' intention to use an adverse event reporting system. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2008, 20(2):123-129.
52. Yu P., Li H., Gagnon M.-P. Health IT acceptance factors in long-term care facilities: a cross-sectional survey. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2009, 78(4):219-229.
53. Zhang H., Cocosila M., Archer N. Factors of adoption of mobile information technology by homecare nurses: a technology acceptance model 2 approach. Comput. Inform. Nurs. 2010, 28(1):49-56.
54. Holden R.J., Brown R.L., Scanlon M.C., Karsh B.-T. Modeling nurses' acceptance of bar coded medication administration technology at a pediatric hospital. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2012, 19(6):1050-1058.
55. Hu P.J., Chau P.Y.K., Sheng O.R.L., Tam K.Y. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 1999, 16(2):91-112.
56. Yi M.Y., Jackson J.D., Park J.S., Probst J.C. Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: toward an integrative view. Inf. Manage. 2006, 43(3):350-363.
57. Duyck P., Pynoo B., Devolder P., Voet T., Adang L., Vercruysse J. User acceptance of a picture archiving and communication system - applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology in a radiological setting. Methods Inf. Med. 2008, 47(2):149-156.
58. Duffy M.E. Translating instruments into other languages: basic considerations. Clin. Nurse Spec. 2006, 20(5):225.
59. Osborne J.W. Best Practices in Data Cleaning: A Complete Guide to Everything You Need to do Before and After Collecting Your Data 2012, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.
60. Blunch N. Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling Using IBM SPSS Statistics and Amos 2013, SAGE Publications Limited, London, UK.
61. Using Multivariate Statistics 2007, Harper Collins College Publishers, New York. 5th ed. B. Tabachnick, L. Fidell (Eds.).
62. Pallant J. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows Version 15 2007, Open University Press.
63. Nunnally J.C. Psychometric Theory 1978, 701. McGraw-Hill, New York. 2nd ed.
64. Osborne J.W. Best Practices in Quantitative Methods 2008, SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.
65. Mueller R.O., Hancock G.R. Best practices in structural equation modeling. Best Practices in Quantitative Methods 2008, 488-508. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA. J.W. Osborne (Ed.).
66. Healthcare Information Management Systems Society Electronic Medical Record Adoption Model (EMRAM) 2014, Available from: https://www.himssanalytics.org/emram/emram.aspx (accessed 18.08.14).
67. Alexander G., Staggers N. A systematic review on the designs of clinical technology: findings and recommendations for future research. ANS Adv. Nurs. Sci. 2009, 32(3):252-279.
68. Borycki E., Lemieux-Charles L., Nagle L., Eysenbach G. Evaluating the impact of hybrid electronic-paper environments upon novice nurse information seeking. Methods Inf. Med. 2009, 48(2):137-143.
69. Adamson I., Shine J. Extending the new technology acceptance model to measure the end user information systems satisfaction in a mandatory environment: a banks treasury. Technol. Anal. Strat. Manage. 2003, 15(4):441-455.
70. Sørebø Ø., Eikebrokk T.R. Explaining IS continuance in environments where usage is mandatory. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2008, 24(5):2357-2371.
71. Yen P.-Y., Sousa K.H., Bakken S. Examining construct and predictive validity of the Health-IT Usability Evaluation Scale: confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling results. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 2014, 21(e2):e241-e248. (Published online).