Digital divide; Health inequalities; Health inequities; Personal health records; User acceptance of information technology
Abstract :
[en] BACKGROUND: Access to and use of digital technology are more common among people of more advantaged socioeconomic status. These differences might be due to lack of interest, not having physical access or having lower intentions to use this technology. By integrating the digital divide approach and the User Acceptance of Information Technology (UTAUT) model, this study aims to further our understanding of socioeconomic factors and the mechanisms linked to different stages in the use of Personal Health Records (PHR): desire, intentions and physical access to PHR. METHODS: A cross-sectional online and in-person survey was undertaken in the areas of Lorraine (France), Luxembourg, Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland (Germany), and Wallonia (Belgium). Exploratory factor analysis was performed to group items derived from the UTAUT model. We applied linear and logistic regressions controlling for country-level heterogeneity, health and demographic factors. RESULTS: A total of 829 individuals aged over 18 completed the questionnaire. Socioeconomic inequalities were present in the access to and use of PHR. Education and income played a significant role in individuals' desire to access their PHR. Being older than 65 years, and migrant, were negatively associated with desire to access PHR. An income gradient was found in having physical access to PHR, while for the subgroup of respondents who expressed desire to have access, higher educational level was positively associated with intentions to regularly use PHR. In fully adjusted models testing the contribution of UTAUT-derived factors, individuals who perceived PHRs to be useful and had the necessary digital skills were more inclined to use their PHR regularly. Social influence, support and lack of anxiety in using technology were strong predictors of regular PHR use. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the importance of considering all stages in PHR use: desire to access, physical access and intention to regularly use PHRs, while paying special attention to migrants and people with less advantaged socioeconomic backgrounds who may feel financial constraints and are not able to exploit the potential of PHRs. As PHR use is expected to come with health benefits, facilitating access and regular use for those less inclined could reduce health inequalities and advance health equity.
Disciplines :
Public health, health care sciences & services
Author, co-author :
Paccoud, Ivana; Université du Luxembourg - UniLu
Baumann, Michèle; Université du Luxembourg - UniLu
Le Bihan, Etienne; Université du Luxembourg - UniLu
Pétré, Benoît ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences de la santé publique > Education thérap. du patient au serv. des soins int.
Breinbauer, Mareike; Universitätsmedizin Mainz
Böhme, Philip; CHRU Nancy
Chauvel, Louis; Université du Luxembourg - UniLu
Leist, Anja K.; Université du Luxembourg - UniLu
Language :
English
Title :
Socioeconomic and behavioural factors associated with access to and use of Personal Health Records.
Peterson CB, Hamilton C, Hasvold P. From innovation to implementation: eHealth in the WHO European region. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2016. p. 98.
European Commission. Patient access to Electronic Health Records. European Commission; 2013.
Kaelber DC, Shah S, Vincent A, Pan E, Hook JM, Johnston D, et al. The value of personal health records. CITL; 2008.
Doocy S, Paik K, Lyles E, Tam HH, Fahed Z, Winkler E, et al. Pilot testing and implementation of a mHealth tool for non-communicable diseases in a humanitarian setting. PLoS Curr. 2017;9. doi:10.1371/currents.dis.e98c648aac93797b1996a37de099be74 DOI: 10.1371/currents.dis.e98c648aac93797b1996a37de099be74
Denton IC. Will patients use electronic personal health records? Responses from a real-life experience. J Healthc Inf Manag. 2001;15(3):251–60.
Chiesa V, Chiarenza A, Mosca D, Rechel B. Health records for migrants and refugees: a systematic review. Health Policy. 2019;123(9):888–900. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.07.018
Lin SC, Lyles CR, Sarkar U, Adler-Milstein J. Are patients electronically accessing their medical records? evidence from national hospital data. Health Aff. 2019;38(11):1850–7. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05437
Walker DM, Hefner JL, Fareed N, Huerta TR, McAlearney AS. Exploring the digital divide: age and race disparities in use of an inpatient portal. Telemedicine and e-Health. 2019;
Anthony DL, Campos-Castillo C. A looming digital divide? Group differences in the perceived importance of electronic health records. Inf Commun Soc. 2015;18(7):832–46. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1006657
Ancker JS, Nosal S, Hauser D, Way C, Calman N. Access policy and the digital divide in patient access to medical records. Health Policy Technol. 2017;6(1):3–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2016.11.004
Mossberger K, Tolbert CJ, Stansbury M. Virtual inequality: beyond the digital divide. Georgetown University Press; 2003.
Goel MS, Brown TL, Williams A, Hasnain-Wynia R, Thompson JA, Baker DW. Disparities in enrollment and use of an electronic patient portal. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(10):1112–6. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1728-3
Sarkar U, Karter AJ, Liu JY, Adler NE, Nguyen R, López A, et al. Social disparities in internet patient portal use in diabetes: evidence that the digital divide extends beyond access. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18(3):318–21. DOI: 10.1136/jamia.2010.006015
Øversveen E. Stratified users and technologies of empowerment: theorising social inequalities in the use and perception of diabetes self-management technologies. Sociology of Health & Illness [Internet]. 2020 Feb 18 [cited 2020 Mar 6];n/a(n/a). Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13066
Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425–78. DOI: 10.2307/30036540
van Dijk JAGM. Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics. 2006;34(4–5):221–35. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004
Stern MJ. Inequality in the internet age: a twenty-first century dilemma*. Sociol Inquiry. 2010;80(1):28–33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00314.x
Yamin CK, Emani S, Williams DH, Lipsitz SR, Karson AS, Wald JS, et al. The digital divide in adoption and use of a personal health record. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(6):568–74. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.34
Weiss D, Rydland HT, Øversveen E, Jensen MR, Solhaug S, Krokstad S. Innovative technologies and social inequalities in health: a scoping review of the literature. PLoS One [Internet]. 2018 Apr 3 [cited 2019 Apr 19];13(4). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5882163/
Livingstone S, Helsper E. Gradations in digital inclusion: children, young people and the digital divide. New Media Soc. 2007;9(4):671–96. DOI: 10.1177/1461444807080335
Dutton W, Helsper E, Gerber M. The Internet in Britain: Oxford Internet Institute. University of Oxford. 2009.
Mancinelli E. e-Inclusion in the Information Society. Information Society From theory to political practice Coursebook. 2008;171–82.
Bourdieu P. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press; 1984.
Régnier F, Chauvel L. Digital inequalities in the use of self-tracking diet and fitness apps: interview study on the influence of social, economic, and cultural factors. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2018;6(4):e101. DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.9189
Paccoud I, Nazroo J, Leist A. A Bourdieusian approach to class-related inequalities: the role of capitals and capital structure in the utilisation of healthcare services in later life. Sociol Health Illn. 2020;42(3):510–25. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.13028
Or CK, Karsh B-T. A systematic review of patient acceptance of consumer health information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(4):550–60. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2888
Hoogenbosch B, Postma J, de Man-van Ginkel JM, Tiemessen NA, van Delden JJ, van Os-Medendorp H. Use and the Users of a Patient Portal: Cross-Sectional Study. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2018 Sep 17 [cited 2020 Mar 27];20(9). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6231740/
Hoque R, Sorwar G. Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: an extension of the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform. 2017;101:75–84. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.002
Kim S, Lee K-H, Hwang H, Yoo S. Analysis of the factors influencing healthcare professionals’ adoption of mobile electronic medical record (EMR) using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) in a tertiary hospital. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16(1):12. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-016-0249-8
Pétré B, Scholtes B, Voz B, Ortiz Halabi I, Gillain N, Husson E, et al. L’approche patient partenaire de soins en question. Revue Méd de Liège. 2018;73(12):620–5.
Agarwal R, Anderson C, Zarate J, Ward C. If we offer it, will they accept? Factors affecting patient use intentions of personal health records and secure messaging. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2013 Feb 26 [cited 2019 Dec 16];15(2). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636193/
Niehaves B, Plattfaut R. Internet adoption by the elderly: employing IS technology acceptance theories for understanding the age-related digital divide. Eur J Inf Syst. 2014;23(6):708–26. DOI: 10.1057/ejis.2013.19
Savage M. Social class in the 21st century. Penguin UK; 2015.
Houston TK, Allison JJ. Users of internet health information: differences by health status. J Med Internet Res. 2002;4(2):e7. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4.2.e7
Roblin DW, Houston TK, Allison JJ, Joski PJ, Becker ER. Disparities in use of a personal health record in a managed care organization. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(5):683–9. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M3169
Möhring K. The fixed effects as an alternative to multilevel analysis for cross-national analyses. GK Soclife, WorNing paper. 2012;(16).
Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage; 2013.
Katz JE, Rice RE. Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement, and interaction. MIT Press; 2002.
Hsu J, Huang J, Kinsman J, Fireman B, Miller R, Selby J, et al. Use of e-Health Services between 1999 and 2002: a growing digital divide. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12(2):164–71. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1672
Schnittker J. Social distance in the clinical encounter: Interactional and sociodemographic foundations for mistrust in physicians. Soc Psychol Q. 2004;67(3):217–35. DOI: 10.1177/019027250406700301
Eurostat. Digital economy and society statistics-households and individuals. [Internet]. Accessed October 21, 2020, from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Digital_economy_and_society_statistics_-_households_and_individuals
