Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Sensors
Volume 2017, Article ID 8972350, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8972350
Research Article

A Smart Telecare System at Digital Home: Perceived Usefulness, Satisfaction, and Expectations for Healthcare Professionals

1Telematics Systems for Information and Knowledge Society Research Group, Telematics and Electronics Department, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Carretera de Valencia, Km 7, Madrid, Spain
2Centro de Referencia Estatal de Autonomía Personal y Ayudas Técnicas (CEAPAT), Institute for Elderly and Social Services (IMSERSO), Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality, C/Los Extremeños 1, Madrid, Spain

Correspondence should be addressed to María Luisa Martín-Ruiz; se.mpu.letaid@masiram

Received 2 February 2017; Revised 11 May 2017; Accepted 4 July 2017; Published 3 August 2017

Academic Editor: Bruno Andò

Copyright © 2017 Laura Vadillo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. Population Ageing and Development, “Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC),” United Nations, 2012, http://social.un.org/ageing-working-group/documents/2012popageing.pdf.
  2. M. Alwan, S. Dalal, D. Mack et al., “Impact of monitoring technology in assisted living: Outcome pilot,” IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 192–198, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. P. Rashidi and A. Mihailidis, “A survey on ambient-assisted living tools for older adults,” IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 579–590, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. N. W. Averwater and D. C. Burchfield, “No place like home: telemonitoring can improve home care.,” Healthcare financial management : journal of the Healthcare Financial Management Association, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 46–52, 2005. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. T. ETSI, Human Factors (HF), 102 415, Telecare services.
  6. F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 46–53, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S.-P. Su, C.-H. Tsai, and Y.-K. Chen, “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to Explore Intention to Use Telecare System in Taiwan,” in Proceedings of the 13th ACIS International Conference onSoftware Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel & Distributed Computing (SNPD), pp. 353–356, 2012.
  8. B.-K. Chuang, C.-H. Tsai, H.-L. Hsieh, and T. Tumurtulga, “Applying health belief model to explore the adoption of telecare,” in Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACIS 12th International Conference on Computer and Information Science, ICIS 2013, pp. 269–272, jpn, June 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. M. Rahimpour, N. H. Lovell, B. G. Celler, and J. McCormick, “Patients' perceptions of a home telecare system,” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 77, no. 7, pp. 486–498, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. J.-C. Huang, “Innovative health care delivery system-A questionnaire survey to evaluate the influence of behavioral factors on individuals' acceptance of telecare,” Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 281–286, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. C. Sicotte, G. Paré, S. Morin, J. Potvin, and M.-P. Moreault, “Effects of home telemonitoring to support improved care for chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases,” Telemedicine and e-Health, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 95–103, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. Y. Lee, K. A. Kozar, and K. R. T. Larsen, “The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future,” Communications of the AIS, vol. 12, no. 50, pp. 752–780, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  13. R. J. Holden and B.-T. Karsh, “The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care,” Journal of Biomedical Informatics, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 159–172, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. T. M. Peek, E. J. M. Wouters, K. G. Luijkx, and H. J. M. Vrijhoef, “What it Takes to successfully implement technology for aging in place: Focus groups with stakeholders,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 18, no. 5, article no. e98, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M.-P. Gagnon, M. Desmartis, M. Labrecque et al., “Systematic review of factors influencing the adoption of information and communication technologies by healthcare professionals,” Journal of Medical Systems, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 241–277, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. C.-F. Liu, “Key factors influencing the intention of Telecare adoption: An institutional perspective,” Telemedicine and e-Health, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 288–293, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. D. Bouwhuis, L. Meesters, and A. Sponselee, “Models for the acceptance of tele-care solutions: Intention vs behaviour. Gerontechnology, 2012,” http://gerontechnology.info/index.php/journal/article/view/gt.2012.11.01.007.00.
  18. J. M. Peeters, A. J. E. De Veer, L. Van der Hoek, and A. L. Francke, “Factors influencing the adoption of home telecare by elderly or chronically ill people: a national survey,” Journal of Clinical Nursing, vol. 21, no. 21-22, pp. 3183–3193, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. I. v. Weersch, D. Ploegmakers, and R. Blok, Acceptance and Effectiveness of Telecare Services from the End-User Perspective, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  20. N. Balta-Ozkan, R. Davidson, M. Bicket, and L. Whitmarsh, “Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes,” Energy Policy, vol. 63, pp. 363–374, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. T. Luor, H.-P. Lu, H. Yu, and Y. Lu, “Exploring the critical quality attributes and models of smart homes,” Maturitas, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 377–386, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. F. D. Davis, A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mass, USA, 1986.
  23. W. R. King and J. He, “A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model,” Information and management, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 740–755, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  24. B. Szajna, “Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model,” Management Science, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 85–92, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. P. Y. K. Chau and P. J. Hu, “Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: An exploratory study,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 191–229, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. M. P. Gagnon, E. Orruño, J. Asua, A. B. Abdeljelil, and J. Emparanza, “Using a modified technology acceptance model to evaluate healthcare professionals’ adoption of a new telemonitoring system,” Telemedicine and e-Health, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 54–59, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. P. Esmaeilzadeh, M. Sambasivan, N. Kumar, and H. Nezakhati, “Adoption of technology applications in healthcare: The influence of attitude toward knowledge sharing on technology acceptance in a hospital,” Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 264, pp. 17–30, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. Asua, E. Orruño, E. Reviriego, and M. P. Gagnon, “Healthcare professional acceptance of telemonitoring for chronic care patients in primary care,” BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, vol. 12, no. 1, article no. 139, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. A. Kohnke, M. L. Cole, and R. Bush, “Incorporating UTAUT predictors for understanding home care patients’ and clinician’s acceptance of healthcare telemedicine equipment,” Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 29–41, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. W. G. Chismar and S. Wiley-Patton, “Does the extended technology acceptance model apply to physicians,” in Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2003, usa, January 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable,” Information Systems Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 60–95, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. M. Yusof, J. Kuljis, A. Papazafeiropoulou, and L. K. Stergioulas, “An evaluation framework for Health Information Systems: human, organization and technology-fit factors (HOT-fit),” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 77, no. 6, pp. 386–398, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. J. Nielsen, “Usability Engineering. Interactive Technologies. Morgan Kaufmann Series in Interactive Technologies, 1996”.
  36. E. A. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation, The Free Press, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1983.
  37. G. C. Moore and I. Benbasat, “Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation,” Information Systems Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 192–222, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. K. Arning and M. Ziefle, “Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 2904–2927, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus