Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 163–181 | Cite as

Intention to Use a Mobile-Based Information Technology Solution for Tuberculosis Treatment Monitoring – Applying a UTAUT Model

  • Ravi Seethamraju
  • Krishna Sundar Diatha
  • Shashank Garg
Article
  • 144 Downloads

Abstract

There are 2.2 million cases of tuberculosis (TB) in India, with an economic burden of $3 billion per year. Efficient monitoring of TB treatment is critical and the Indian Government’s current reliance on a pen and paper system for monitoring patients’ adherence to treatment is neither effective nor scalable. Employing the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model (UTAUT) as its theoretical foundation, this study investigates the factors influencing the acceptance and use of a mobile-based IT solution for TB treatment monitoring. Data was collected from a survey of healthcare professionals working in TB treatment clinics and analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. Four constructs in the UTAUT model, effort expectancy (EE), facilitating conditions (FC), performance expectancy (PE) and social influence (SI) – were found to significantly and positively influence healthcare professionals’ behavioral intention to use the proposed mobile-based IT solution, and explained 56% of the variance. Importantly, our study validates the predictive capabilities of the UTAUT model in public health service delivery context in a developing country.

Keywords

Public health Mobile UTAUT model TB treatment 

References

  1. Achanta, S., Jaju, J., & Kumar, A. (2013). Tuberculosis management practices by private practitioners in Andhra Pradesh, India. PloS One, 13, e71119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agarwal, R., Gao, G., Des Rodches, C., & Jha, A. K. (2010). The digital transformation of healthcare: Current status and the road ahead. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 796–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alawadhi, S., & Morris, A. (2009). Factors influencing the adoption of e-government services. Journal of Software, 4(6), 584–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review, 3(4), 1265–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anna, V., Jose-Maria, B., Maria-Teresa, D., Caterina, G., Consolaxion, D., Dulcis, S., et al. (2004). The role of mobile phones in improving vaccination rates in travellers. Preventive Medicine, 38, 503–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating Nonresponse bias in Mail Surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bagchi, K., Hart, P., & Peterson, M. (2004). National culture and information technology product adoption. Journal of Global Information Technology, 7(4), 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barclay, D. W., Higgins, C. A., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least squares approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as illustration. Technology Studies, 2, 285–309.Google Scholar
  10. Bauer, S., Percevic, R., Okon, E., Meermann, R., & Kordy, H. (2003). Use of text messaging in the aftercare of patients with bulimia nervosa. European Eating Disorders Review, 11, 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: a baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, S. A., Kelly, H., & Schwar, A. (2006). Reflections on the role of theoretical extensions in the IS discipline: special issue introduction. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 37(2–3), 8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, S. A., Dennis, A. R., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Predicting collaboration technology use: integrating technology adoption and collaboration research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 9–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burton-Jones, A., & Hubona, G. S. (2006). The mediation of external variables in technology acceptance model. Information Management, 43, 706–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carstensen, L. L., Fung, H. H., & Charles, S. T. (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation Emotion, 27(June 2), 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chang, I. C., Hwang, H. G., Hung, M. C., Lin, M. H., & Yen, D. C. (2007). Factors affecting the adoption of electronic signature: executives’ perspective of hospital information department. Decision Support Systems, 44(91), 350–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Information Management, 39(4), 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., Wu, S., Maglione, M., Mojica, W., Roth, E., Morton, S. C., & Shekelle, P. G. (2006). Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144, 742–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analysis. In V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications in marketing and related fields (pp. 655–690). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cimperman, M., Brencic, M. M., & Trkman, P. (2016). Analysing older users’ home telehealth services acceptance behaviour-applying an Extended UTAUT model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 90, 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. De Vaus, D. A. (2014). Surveys in social research (6th ed.). Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  26. Downer, S. R., Meara, J. G., & Da Costa, A. C. (2005). Use of SMS text messaging to improve outpatient attendance. The Medical Journal of Australia, 183(7), 366–368.Google Scholar
  27. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2017). Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised Theoretical Model. Information Systems Frontiers.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y published online on 8 June 2017.
  28. Fitchett, J. R., MacPherson, P., & Corbett, E. L. (2016). Implementing the end TB strategy and the intersection with the sustainability development goals, 2016-2030. Transactions Royal Society for Tropical Medicine & Hygiene, 110(3), 145–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Foon, Y. S., & Fah, B. C. Y. (2011). Internet banking in Kuala Lumpur: An application of UTAUT model. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(4), 161–167.Google Scholar
  30. Gagnon, M.-P., Ngangue, P., Gagnon, J.-P., & Desmartis, M. (2016). m-Health adoption by healthcare professionals: a systematic review. Journal of American Medical Information Association, 23, 212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Garg, S., & Mony, P. K. (2013). Electronic data capture for health surveys in developing countries: use of a mobile phone based application in Southern India. Indian Journal of Medical Informatics, 7(2), 84–93.Google Scholar
  32. Gefen, D., Rigdon, E. E., & Straub, D. (2011). Editor’s comments: an update and extension to SEM guidelines for administrative and social science research. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), A1–A7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Goodhue, D.L., Lewis, W., Thompson, R. (2006). PLS, Small Sample Size, and Statistical Power in MIS Research. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  34. Goodhue, D. L., Lewis, W., & Thompson, R. (2012). Does PLS have advantages for small sample size or non-normal data? MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 981–1001.Google Scholar
  35. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modelling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 414–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hair Jr., J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modelling. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  38. Holden, R., & Karsh, B. Z. (2010). The Technology Acceptance Model: its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Sheng, O. R. L., & Tam, K. Y. (1999). Examining the Technology Acceptance Model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jarosawlski, S., & Pai, M. (2012). Why are inaccurate tuberculosis serological tests widely used in the Indian private healthcare sector? A root-cause analysis. Journal of Epidemial Global Health, 2, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 386–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Khechine, H., Lakhal, S., & Ndjambou, P. (2016). A meta-analysis of the UTAUT model: eleven years later. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 33, 138–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kijsanayotin, B., Pannarunothai, S., & Speedie, S. M. (2009). Factors influencing health information technology adoption in Thailand’s community health centres: applying the UTAUT Model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(6), 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kim, S., Lee, K.-H., Hwang, H., & Yoo, S. (2016). 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 Medical Informatcis and Decision Making, 16, 12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-016-0249-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2016). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: the inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131.
  46. Lapointe, L., & Rivard, S. (2006). Getting physicians to accept new information technology: insights from case studies. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 174(11), 1573–1578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lee, A. S., & Baskerville, R. L. (2003). Generalizing generalizability in information systems research. Information Systems Research, 14(3), 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: an empirical study of knowledge workers. MIS Quarterly, 27, 657–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Melas, C. D., Zampetakis, L. A., Dimopoulou, A., & Moustakis, V. (2011). Modeling the acceptance of clinical information systems among hospital medical staff: an extended TAM model. Journal of Biomed Informatics, 44(4), 553–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morris, M. G., Venkatesh, V., & Ackerman, P. L. (2005). Gender and age in technology adoption and usage decisions: toward the emergence of a unisex work force. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(1), 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nunnaly, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  52. Nysveen, H., & Pedersen, P. E. (2016). Consumer adoption of RFID-enabled services. Applying an extended UTAUT model. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(2), 293–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Oliveira, T., & Martins, M. F. (2011). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 110–121.Google Scholar
  54. Pai, M., Yadav, P., & Anupindi, R. (2014). Tuberculosis control needs a complete and patient-centric solution. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2, e189–e190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109X(14)70198-6 Accessed 10 July 2014.Google Scholar
  55. Pai, M., Daftary, A., & Satyanarayana, S. (2016). TB control: challenges and opportunities for India. Transactions Royal Society for Tropical Medicine & Hygiene, 110(3), 158–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Peng, D. X., & Lai, F. (2012). Using partial least squares in operations management research: a practical guideline and summary of past research. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 467–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An Empirical Comparison of the Efficacy of Covariance-Based and Variance-Based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W. (2012). Editor’s comments: a critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), iii–xiv.Google Scholar
  59. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmgH http://www.smartpls.com.Google Scholar
  60. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  61. Sarstedt, M., Henseler, J., & Ringle, C. M. (2011). Multigroup analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modelling: alternative methods and empirical results. In M. Sarstedt, M. Schwaiger, & C. R. Taylor (Eds.), Measurement and research methods in international marketing (advances in international marketing, volume 22) (pp. 195–218). Bradford: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Seeman, E., & Gibson, S. (2009). Predicting acceptance of electronic medical records: is the Technology Acceptance Model enough? SAM Advanced Management Journal, 74(4), 21–26.Google Scholar
  63. Seethamraju, R. (2015). Adoption of Software as a Service (SaaS) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Information Systems Frontiers, 17(3), 475–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Soper, D.S. (2017). A-priori sample size calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. Available from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc. Acessed 6 Feb 2017.
  65. Sun, J., & Qu, Z. (2015). Understanding health information technology adoption: A synthesis of literature from an activity perspective. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(5), 1177–1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tanimura, T., Jaramillo, E., Weil, D., Raviglione, M., & Lonnroth, K. (2014). Financial burden for tuberculosis patients in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. European Respiratory Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00193413.
  67. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 124–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tornatzky, L. G., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The processes of technological innovation. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  69. Udwadia, Z. F. (2012). MDR, XDR, TDR tuberculosis: ominous progression. Thorax, 67, 286–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Udwadia, Z. F., Pinto, L. M., & Uplekar, M. W. (2010). Tuberculosis management by private practitioners in Mumbai, India: has anything changed in two decades? PloS One, 5, e12023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E., Nijland, N., van Limburg, M., Ossebaard, H. C., Kelders, S. M., Eysenbach, G., et al. (2011). A holistic framework to improve the uptake and impact of eHealth technologies. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(4), e111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vandan, N., Ali, M., Prasad, R., & Kuroiwa, C. (2009). Assessment of doctors’ knowledge regarding tuberculosis management in Lucknow, India: a public–private sector comparison. Public Health, 123, 484–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Venkatesh, V. (2010). Technology acceptance, summary of technology acceptance models. http://www.vvenkatesh.com/IT/organizations/Theoretical_Models.asp. Accessed 10 Nov 2015.
  74. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(3), 273–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behaviour. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Venkatesh, V., & Zhang, X. (2010). Culture and technology adoption: theory and empirical test of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in the US vs China. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 13(1), 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Venkatesh, V., Zhang, X., & Sykes, T. A. (2011a). Doctors do too little technology: a longitudinal field study of an electronic healthcare. Journal Information Systems Research, 22(3), 523–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Venkatesh, V., Sykes, T. A., & Zhang, X. (2011b). Just what the doctor ordered: a revised UTAUT for EMR system adoption and use by doctors. Proceedings of the 44 th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10).Google Scholar
  81. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.Google Scholar
  82. Wang, Y.-S., & Shih, Y.-W. (2009). Why do people use information Kiosks? A validation of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Warshaw, P. R. (1980). A new model for predicting behavioural intentions: an alternative to Fishbein. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(2), 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. WHO. (2007). Tuberculosis surveillance and monitoring – Report of an intercountry consultation. World Health Organization (WHO): New Delhi.Google Scholar
  85. WHO (2011). The global plan to stop TB. www.stoptb.org/global/plan/. Accessed 6 Sept 2016.
  86. WHO. (2014). Global Tuberculosis Report 2013. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO).Google Scholar
  87. WHO (2015). Global tuberculosis report 2015, 20th edition. http://www.who.int/tb/publications/global_report/en. Accessed 8 Sept 2016.
  88. Wong, K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24, Technical Note 1, (pp. 1–32). Downloaded from http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz. Accessed 14 Feb 2017.
  89. Zhang, N., Guo, X., & Chen, G. (2011). Why adoption and use behaviour of IT/IS cannot last? – two studies in China. Information Systems Frontiers, 13(2), 381–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of Sydney Business SchoolSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Indian Institute of Management BangaloreBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations