Public attitudes towards the use of novel technologies in their future healthcare: a UK survey

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making - Tập 23 Số 1
Sarah Sauchelli1, Timothy Pickles2, Alexandra Voinescu3, Heungjae Choi4, Benjamin E. Sherlock5, Jingjing Zhang6, Steffi Colyer7, Sabrina Grant8, Sethu Sundari9, Gemma Lasseter10
1National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals of Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
2Centre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
3Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK
4School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
5College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
6Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, UK
7Department of Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK
8Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
9School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK
10NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, University of Bristol in Collaboration with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), Bristol Medical School, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Tóm tắt

Abstract Background Innovation in healthcare technologies can result in more convenient and effective treatment that is less costly, but a persistent challenge to widespread adoption in health and social care is end user acceptability. The purpose of this study was to capture UK public opinions and attitudes to novel healthcare technologies (NHTs), and to better understand the factors that contribute to acceptance and future use. Methods An online survey was distributed to the UK public between April and May 2020. Respondents received brief information about four novel healthcare technologies (NHTs) in development: a laser-based tool for early diagnosis of osteoarthritis, a virtual reality tool to support diabetes self-management, a non-invasive continuous glucose monitor using microwave signals, a mobile app for patient reported monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis. They were queried on their general familiarity and attitudes to technology, and their willingness to accept each NHT in their future care. Responses were analysed using summary statistics and content analysis. Results Knowledge about NHTs was diverse, with respondents being more aware about the health applications of mobile apps (66%), followed by laser-based technology (63.8%), microwave signalling (28%), and virtual reality (18.3%). Increasing age and the presence of a self-reported medical condition favoured acceptability for some NHTs, whereas self-reported understanding of how the NHT works resulted in elevated acceptance scores across all NHTs presented. Common contributors to hesitancy were safety and risks from use. Respondents wanted more information and evidence to help inform their decisions, ideally provided verbally by a general practitioner or health professional. Other concerns, such as privacy, were NHT-specific but equally important in decision-making. Conclusions Early insight into the knowledge and preconceptions of the public about NHTs in development can assist their design and prospectively mitigate obstacles to acceptance and adoption.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Age UK. Later Life in the United Kingdom [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Mar 19]. Available from: http://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/reports-and-publications/later_life_uk_factsheet.pdf

Snell T, Wittenberg R, Fernandez JL, Malley J, Comas-Herrera A, King D. Projections of demand for social care and disability benefits for younger adults in england report of research conducted for the commission on funding of care and support. 2011.

Public Health England. Health matters: obesity and the food environment - GOV.UK [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2021 Mar 19]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-matters-obesity-and-the-food-environment/health-matters-obesity-and-the-food-environmen-2

HM Treasury. Plan for Jobs. 2020.

HM Treasury. CP 297—Winter Economy Plan—September 2020. 2020.

Department of Health. Innovation, Health and Wealth. Accelerating adoption and diffusion in the NHS. Department of Health, editor. London; 2011.

HEE. Preparing the healthcare workforce to deliver the digital future The Topol Review. an independent report on behalf of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. Nhs. 2019;(February):102.

Shore J, Green M, Hardy A, Livesey D. The compliance and cost-effectiveness of smartphone urinalysis albumin screening for people with diabetes in England. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2020;20(4):387–95.

Bolinder J, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, Kröger J, Weitgasser R. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2016;388(10057):2254–63.

Thiyagarajan A, Grant C, Griffiths F, Atherton H. Exploring patients’ and clinicians’ experiences of video consultations in primary care: a systematic scoping review. BJGP Open. 2020;4(1).

Campbell B, Dobson L, Higgins J, Dillon B, Marlow M, Pomfrett C. A new health technology assessment system for devices: the first five years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017;33(1):19–24.

Shaw S, Wherton J, Vijayaraghavan S, Morris J, Bhattacharya S, Hanson P, et al. Health services and delivery research. 2018;6(21).

Jeffries M, Phipps D, Howard RL, Avery A, Rodgers S, Ashcroft D. Understanding the implementation and adoption of an information technology intervention to support medicine optimisation in primary care: Qualitative study using strong structuration theory. BMJ Open. 2017;7(5):1–10.

Zanaboni P, Wootton R. Adoption of routine telemedicine in Norwegian hospitals: progress over 5 years. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):1–13.

Greenhalgh T, Shaw S, Wherton J, Vijayaraghavan S, Morris J, Bhattacharya S, et al. Real-world implementation of video outpatient consultations at macro, meso, and micro levels: mixed-method study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(4).

Regan DT, Fazio R. On the consistency between attitudes and behavior: look to the method of attitude formation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1977;13(1):28–45.

Johnson J, Rogers W. Innovative surgery: the ethical challenges. J Med Ethics. 2012;38(1):9–12.

Morris ZS, wooding S, Grant J,. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: Understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20.

Grundy Q, Hutchison K, Johnson J, Blakely B, Clay-Wlliams R, Richards B, et al. Device representatives in hospitals: are commercial imperatives driving clinical decision-making? J Med Ethics. 2018;44(9):589–92.

O’Connor S, Hanlon P, O’Donnell CA, Garcia S, Glanville J, Mair FS. Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Vol. 16, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. BioMed Central Ltd; 2016. p. 120.

Hardiker NR, Grant MJ. Factors that influence public engagement with eHealth: a literature review. Int J Med Inform. 2011;80:1–12.

Budd J, Miller BS, Manning EM, Lampos V, Zhuang M, Edelstein M, et al. Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19. Nat Med Nat Res. 2020;26:1183–92.

Western MJ, Armstrong MEG, Islam I, Morgan K, Jones UF, Kelson MJ. Improving children’s fundamental movement skills through a family-based physical activity program: results from the “Active 1 + FUN” randomized controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021;18:148.

Lee CC, Czaja SJ, Moxley JH, Sharit J, Boot WR, Charness N, et al. Attitudes toward computers across adulthood from 1994 to 2013. Gerontologist. 2019;59(1):22.

Swain S, Sarmanova A, Mallen C, Kuo CF, Coupland C, Doherty M, et al. Trends in incidence and prevalence of osteoarthritis in the United Kingdom: findings from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2020;28(6):792–801.

Whicher CA, O’Neill S, Holt RIG. Diabetes in the UK: 2019. Diabet Med. 2020;37(2):242–7.

NHS Digital. Statistics on Obesity, Physical Activity and Diet, England, 2020 [Internet]. [cited 2021 Nov 21]. Available from: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/statistics-on-obesity-physical-activity-and-diet/england-2020/part-3-adult-obesity-copy

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Rheumatoid Arthritis: How common is it? [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2021 Nov 18]. Available from: https://cks.nice.org.uk/topics/rheumatoid-arthritis/background-information/prevalence-incidence/

Office for National Statistics. Research report on population estimates by ethnic group and religion. 2019;(December):1–19.

Kim HC. Acceptability engineering: The study of user acceptance of innovative technologies. J Appl Res Technol. 2015;13(2):230–7.

Holden RJ, Karsh BT. The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform. 2010;43(1):159–72.

Kyratsis Y, Ahmad R, Holmes A. Technology adoption and implementation in organisations: comparative case studies of 12 English NHS Trusts. BMJ Open. 2012;2(2):1–9.

Hauk N, Hüffmeier J, Krumm S. Ready to be a silver surfer? A meta-analysis on the relationship between chronological age and technology acceptance. Comput Human Behav. 2018;84:304–19.

Chen K, Chan AHS. A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology. 2011;10(1):1–12.

Mallenius S, Rossi M, Tuunainen V. Factors affecting the adoption and use of mobile devices and services by elderly people - results from a pilot study. In: 6th Annual Global Mobility Roundtable. Los Angeles; 2007.

Shahab L, McGowan JA, Waller J, Smith SG. Prevalence of beliefs about actual and mythical causes of cancer and their association with socio-demographic and health-related characteristics: findings from a cross-sectional survey in England. Eur J Cancer. 2018;103:308–16.

Miller MR, Herrera F, Jun H, Landay JA, Bailenson JN. Personal identifiability of user tracking data during observation of 360-degree VR video. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):1–10.

Huygelier H, Schraepen B, van Ee R, Vanden Abeele V, Gillebert CR. Acceptance of immersive head-mounted virtual reality in older adults. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):1–12.

Zhou L, Bao J, Watzlaf V, Parmanto B. Barriers to and facilitators of the use of mobile health apps from a security perspective: mixed-methods study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7(4):e11223.

Sturgis P, Allum N. Science in society: re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understand Sci. 2004;13(1):55–74.

Garrett PM, White JP, Lewandowsky S, Kashima Y, Perfors A, Little DR, et al. The acceptability and uptake of smartphone tracking for COVID-19 in Australia. PLoS ONE. 2021;16:1–23.

Bauer MS, Kirchner JA. Implementation science: What is it and why should I care? Vol. 283, Psychiatry Research. Elsevier Ireland Ltd; 2020. p. 112376.

Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82:581–629.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Shared decision-making NICE guideline [NG197]. 2021.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Tập 23 Số 1

Thông tin tác giả