Volume : 09, Issue : 02, February – 2022

Title:

21.LEVELS AND DETERMINANTS OF OPENNESS TO USING TELEMEDICINE TECHNOLOGY AMONG FAMILY MEDICINE PHYSICIAN AT THE PRIMARY CARE

Authors :

Abdullah Hamdan Alshehri, Rakan Fahad Alshaalan, Ahmed Mohammed Saleh, Dr. Bandar Mohammad Shaher

Abstract :

The use of telemedicine technology (TMT) has been increasing in Saudi Arabia in the past few years. However, its effectiveness is limited by levels of use (LoU) and acceptance, notably among physicians. Furthermore, there is lack of data regarding the acceptance of TMT in primary healthcare (PHC).
Objective: To explore the acceptance of TMT among PHC family medicine physicians (FMP) using the technology acceptance model (TAM), and to analyze eventual external factors.
Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Ministry of Health (MoH) primary healthcare centers (PHCCs) in Riyadh city, Saudi Arabia, during June – October 2021. A cluster sampling method was used to recruit 150 FMPs. An electronic questionnaire was designed based on TAM, and comprised four subscales: current LoU, perceived usefulness or harmfulness (PUH) of TMT in primary care, perceived ease of use (PEoU), and behavioral intention to use TMT. All four subscales enabled calculation of scores.
Result: All subscales showed good reliability. The mean (SD) PUH score was 61.17 (18.69) out of 100, and perceptions were significantly positive for 23 out of the 25 PUH items (mean score >0, p-value<0.05, [one-sample t-test]). The highest mean score was observed in the item related to physicians’ rights (0.75 out of 2), followed by medical confidentiality (0.73), and equitable access to care (0.71). On the other hand, perception was lowest for diagnostic accuracy (0.05) and negative for medical student’s training (-0.20). The multivariate model of PUH showed age category (B = -7.26; 95% CI = -13.47, -1.04; p=0.022) and PEoU score (B = 2.56; 95% CI = 1.93, 3.20; p<0.001) to be independently associated with PUH score, explaining 36.0% of the PUH score variance.
Behavioral intention model sowed PEoU to be the sole independent factor for behavioral intention (B=0.65; 95% CI = 0.54, 0.75; p<0.001), explaining 62.5% of behavioral intention score variance. The mean (SD) PEoU was 17.66 (3.93) and the mean (SD) behavioral intention score was 14.32 (3.42).
Conclusion: FMPs in Riyadh have favorable perceptions towards TMT and its implementation in PHC. However, there are reservations with regards to quality care, training of healthcare professionals, financial, and social stability of the physicians.
Keywords: telemedicine technology, perceived usefulness of harmfulness, behavioral intention, medical students, family medicine physicians, subscales.

Cite This Article:

Please cite this article in press Abdullah Hamdan Alshehri et al, Levels And Determinants Of Openness To Using Telemedicine Technology Among Family Medicine Physician At The Primary Care., Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2022; 09(2).

Number of Downloads : 10

References:

1. Alajmi D, Khalifa M, Jamal A, Zakaria N, Alomran S, El-Metwally A, et al. The role and use of telemedicine by physicians in developing countries: a case report from Saudi Arabia. In Transforming Public Health in Developing Nations. edited by Sheikh M, Mahamoud A, and Househ M. 293-308. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2015.
2. Strehle EM, Shabde N. One hundred years of telemedicine: does this new technology have a place in paediatrics? Arch Dis Child. 2006;91(12):956–9.
3. Taylor L, Portnoy JM. Telemedicine for general pediatrics. Pediatr Ann. 2019;48(12):e479–84.
4. Telemedicine: opportunities and developments in member states: report on the second global survey on eHealth. World Health Organization; 2010: 93. (Global Observatory for eHealth Series, 2). Available at: https://www.who.int/goe/publications/goe_telemedicine_2010.pdf. Accessed on 15-Jan-2022.
5. Telemedicine market size & share, growth outlook 2021-2027. Available at: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/telemedicine-market. Accessed on 11-Jan-2022.
6. Burg G. Telemedicine and teledermatology. Current problems in dermatology. 2003;32: Karger Medical and Scientific Publishers.
7. Albarrak AI, Mohammed R, Almarshoud N, Almujalli L, Aljaeed R, Altuwaijiri S, et al. Assessment of physician’s knowledge, perception and willingness of telemedicine in Riyadh region, Saudi Arabia. J Infect Public Health. 2021;14(1):97–102.
8. Nasser HA. Assessment of telemedicine by physicians at Prince Sultan Military Medical City. J Nutr Hum Health. 2017;1(1):1–10.
9. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management science. 1989;35(8):982–1003.
10. Lai PC. The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. J Inf Syst Technol Manag. 2017;14(1):21–38.
11. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science. 2000;46(2):186–204.
12. Hall GE, Dirksen DJ, George AA. Measuring implementation in schools: Levels of use. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory; 2006.
13. Chau PYK, Hu PJ-H. Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Information & management. 2002;39(4):297–311.
14. Chow M, Herold DK, Choo T-M, Chan K. Extending the technology acceptance model to explore the intention to use Second Life for enhancing healthcare education. Comput Educ. 2012;59(4):1136–44.
15. Pierce BS, Perrin PB, McDonald SD. Path analytic modeling of psychologists’ openness to performing clinical work with telepsychology: A national study. J Clin Psychol. 2020;76(6):1135–50.
16. Andrews V. Using telemedicine in clinical decision-making. Practice Nursing. 2014;25(1):42–6.
17. Galiero R, Pafundi PC, Nevola R, Rinaldi L, Acierno C, Caturano A, et al. The importance of telemedicine during COVID-19 pandemic: a focus on diabetic retinopathy. J Diabetes Res 2020;2020:1– 8.
18. Ryu S. Telemedicine: opportunities and developments in member states: report on the second global survey on eHealth 2009 (global observatory for eHealth series, volume 2). Healthc Inform Res. 2012;18(2):153–5.
19. Ohannessian R, Duong TA, Odone A. Global telemedicine implementation and integration within health systems to fight the COVID-19 pandemic: a call to action. JMIR Public Health Surveill.2020;6(2):e18810.
20. Hollander JE, Carr BG. Virtually perfect? Telemedicine for COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(18):1679–81.
21. Gomez T, Anaya YB, Shih KJ, Tarn DM. A qualitative study of primary care physicians’ experiences with telemedicine during COVID-19. J Am Board Fam Med. 2021;34(Supplement):S61–70.
22. Jetty A, Moore MA, Coffman M, Petterson S, Bazemore A. Rural Family Physicians Are Twice as Likely to Use Telehealth as Urban Family Physicians. Telemed J E Health. 2018;24(4):268–76.
23. Kim H-S. Towards telemedicine adoption in Korea: 10 practical recommendations for physicians. J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(17):e103.
24. Jalabneh R, Zehra Syed H, Pillai S, Hoque Apu E, Hussein MR, Kabir R, et al. Use of mobile phone apps for contact tracing to control the COVID-19 pandemic: a literature review. SSRN J. Preprint posted online July. 2020;5.
25. Alghamdi S, Alqahtani J, Aldhahir A. Current status of telehealth in Saudi Arabia during COVID-19. J Family Community Med. 2020;27(3):208.
26. Amin J, Siddiqui AA, Al-Oraibi S, Alshammary F, Amin S, Abbas T, et al. The potential and practice of telemedicine to empower patient-centered healthcare in Saudi Arabia. Int Medical J. 2020;27(2):151–4.
27. Eddine IS, Zedan HS. Telehealth role during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned from health care providers in Saudi Arabia. Telemed J E Health. 2021;27(11):1249–59.
28. Yang H, Zhang X. Investigating the effect of paid and free feedback about physicians’ telemedicine services on patients’ and physicians’ behaviors: panel data analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019 22;21(3):e12156.
29. Ruiz Morilla MD, Sans M, Casasa A, Giménez N. Implementing technology in healthcare: insights from physicians. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017;17(1):92.
30. Antoniotti NM. Business Aspects of Telemedicine. In: Telemedicine, Telehealth and Telepresence. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2021:141–55.
31. Brizio A, Faure V, Baudino F. Medical semiotics in the telemedicine era: The birth of telesemiotics. Int J Med Inform. 2022;157:104573.
32. Galpin K, Sikka N, King SL, Horvath KA, Shipman SA, Evans N, et al. Expert consensus: telehealth skills for health care professionals. Telemed J E Health. 2021;27(7):820–4.
33. Balaji A, Clever S Lou. Incorporating medical students into primary care telehealth visits: Tutorial. JMIR Med Educ. 2021;7(2):e24300.
34. Haleem A, Javaid M, Singh RP, Suman R. Telemedicine for healthcare: Capabilities, features, barriers, and applications. Sens Int. 2021;2:100117.
35. Ha JF, Longnecker N. Doctor-patient communication: a review. Ochsner J. 2010;10(1):38–43.
36. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 587: Effective patient-physician communication. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(2 Pt 1):389-393.