Whether the factors of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity influence care providers’ willingness to adopt shared electronic health records

PhD Thesis


Pullen, Troy D.. 2012. Whether the factors of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity influence care providers’ willingness to adopt shared electronic health records. PhD Thesis Doctor of Philosophy. University of Southern Queensland.
Title

Whether the factors of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity influence care providers’ willingness to adopt shared electronic health records

TypePhD Thesis
Authors
AuthorPullen, Troy D.
SupervisorMaguire, Heather
Institution of OriginUniversity of Southern Queensland
Qualification NameDoctor of Philosophy
Number of Pages234
Year2012
Abstract

Based on an adaptation of Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation theory, this dissertation addresses the following research question - Whether the factors of relative advantage, compatibility and complexity influence care providers’ willingness to adopt shared electronic health records (SEHRs).
Secondary data was collated through an extensive literature review of the legislative and regulatory environment related to health records and the emergence of shared electronic health records. Data was then collected through a self administered questionnaire distributed to over 5000 active members of the Australian Medical Association Queensland (AMAQ).
Data analysis initially comprised the use of Categorical Principal Component Analysis (CATPCA) to refine the variables related to Relative advantage, Compatibility and Complexity. Multiple regression analysis was then conducted to test the relationship between the dimensions of these three independent variables and the dependant variable future willingness to adopt SEHRs. Thirdly Chi-Square analysis was conducted to test whether future willingness to adopt SEHRs varied across the three tiers of the health sector or between public and private sector health care providers.
The data revealed that while 72% of those surveyed were willing to adopt SEHRs, significant differences existed between public and private sector care providers and across the three tiers of the health system (GP’s, Specialists and Hospital Staff). In relation to the factors influencing future willingness to adopt SEHR’s, the variables comprising Relative advantage were shown to have a significant impact upon future willingness to adopt SEHRs (significance levels <.001). An examination of the two dimensions of Relative advantage i.e. perceptions of benefits of technology in general and perceptions of potential advantages of SEHRs found that perceptions of the benefits of technology in general had the greatest potential influence on care providers’ willingness to adopt. The variables comprising Compatibility were also shown to have a significant impact upon future willingness to adopt SEHRs (significance levels <.001). A comparison of the two dimensions comprising Compatibility i.e. perceived potential to improve communication between care providers’ and perceived compatibility of SEHRs with care providers’ values relating to patient care found that the variables best explained as the perceived compatibility of SEHRs with care providers values relating to patient care had the most significant potential to influence care providers willingness to adopt SEHRs. Finally, a significant relationship was also found to exist between the variables comprising Complexity and care providers’ willingness to adopt SEHRs (significance level .037). When comparing the dimensions of Complexity i.e. perceived complexity related to information and records management and perceived complexity relating to compliance issues existed, only the variables best explained as perceived complexity relating to compliance proved to have any statistically significant influence on care providers’ future willingness to adopt SEHRs.
The findings from this dissertation will benefit those responsible for the future introduction of SEHRs, specifically by allowing policy makers to target the factors that influence care providers’ willingness to adopt. The use of perceptions of both currently experienced advantages/disadvantages of technology and perceptions of advantages/disadvantages of future adoption of technology and specifically SEHR’s will also assist in revealing barriers to successful implementation of shared electronic health records.
This study also paves the way for future research to be conducted utilising a much larger sample tailored specifically to the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR) system to be introduced in Australia from July 2012.

Keywordscare providers; electronic health records; health system; technology; personally controlled electronic health records
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020429999. Other health sciences not elsewhere classified
420399. Health services and systems not elsewhere classified
420306. Health care administration
Byline AffiliationsFaculty of Business and Law
Permalink -

https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q1y7v/whether-the-factors-of-relative-advantage-compatibility-and-complexity-influence-care-providers-willingness-to-adopt-shared-electronic-health-records

Download files


Published Version
Pullen_2012_whole.pdf
File access level: Anyone

  • 2653
    total views
  • 581
    total downloads
  • 7
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

Shared electronic health records as innovation: an Australian case
Pullen, Troy and Al-Hakim, Latif. 2016. "Shared electronic health records as innovation: an Australian case." Al-Hakim, Latif, Wu, Xiaobu, Koronios, Andy and Shou, Yongyi (ed.) Handbook of research on driving competitive advantage through sustainable, lean and disruptive innovation. Hershey, USA. IGI Global. pp. 500-533
The information management risk construct: identifying the potential impact of information quality on corporate risk
Pullen, Troy and Maguire, Heather. 2007. "The information management risk construct: identifying the potential impact of information quality on corporate risk." International Journal of Information Quality. 1 (4), pp. 412-443.