scholarly journals Examining the Role of Technology Anxiety and Health Anxiety on Elderly Users’ Continuance Intention for Mobile Health Services Use

Author(s):  
Fanbo Meng ◽  
Xitong Guo ◽  
Xiaofei Zhang ◽  
Zeyu Peng ◽  
Kee-Hung Lai
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fanbo Meng ◽  
Xitong Guo ◽  
Zeyu Peng ◽  
Qiang Ye ◽  
Kee-Hung Lai

PurposeMobile health (mHealth) services are considered an important means of relieving the problems of the aging population. The efficiency of mHealth services can be enhanced by engaging more elderly users and guaranteeing their continued use. However, limited attention has been directed toward investigating elderly users' continuance intention regarding mHealth services. The purpose of this paper is to explain elderly users' continuance intention by investigating the contingent role of technology anxiety and health anxiety on affective trust and cognitive trust.Design/methodology/approachSurvey data were collected from 232 elderly users to verify the research model and hypotheses based on structural equation modeling (SEM).FindingsThis study revealed that both affective and cognitive trust enhance elderly users' continuance intention regarding their use of mHealth services. Health anxiety strengthens the effect of cognitive trust but weakens the effect of affective trust with regard to continuance intention. Furthermore, technology anxiety strengthens the effect of affective trust but not the effect of cognitive trust with regard to continuance intention.Originality/valueThis study is one of the first to examine elderly users' continuance intention regarding mHealth services use from the perspective of affective and cognitive trust, thus enriching the extant literature on the use of mHealth services. Additionally, this study sheds light on the contingent effects of technology anxiety and health anxiety on affective and cognitive trust, which have been neglected by previous research.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 111 (5) ◽  
pp. 956-963 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Weathers ◽  
C. Minkovitz ◽  
P. O'Campo ◽  
M. Diener-West

Author(s):  
Nisha Naicker ◽  
Frank Pega ◽  
David Rees ◽  
Spo Kgalamono ◽  
Tanusha Singh

Background: There are approximately two billion workers in the informal economy globally. Compared to workers in the formal economy, these workers are often marginalised with minimal or no benefits from occupational health and safety regulations, labour laws, social protection and/or health care. Thus, informal economy workers may have higher occupational health risks compared to their formal counterparts. Our objective was to systematically review and meta-analyse evidence on relative differences (or inequalities) in health services use and health outcomes among informal economy workers, compared with formal economy workers. Methods: We searched PubMed and EMBASE in March 2020 for studies published in 1999–2020. The eligible population was informal economy workers. The comparator was formal economy workers. The eligible outcomes were general and occupational health services use, fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries, HIV, tuberculosis, musculoskeletal disorders, depression, noise-induced hearing loss and respiratory infections. Two authors independently screened records, extracted data, assessed risk of bias with RoB-SPEO, and assessed quality of evidence with GRADE. Inverse variance meta-analyses were conducted with random effects. Results: Twelve studies with 1,637,297 participants from seven countries in four WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean and Western Pacific) were included. Compared with formal economy workers, informal economy workers were found to be less likely to use any health services (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.85–0.94, four studies, 195,667 participants, I2 89%, low quality of evidence) and more likely to have depression (odds ratio 5.02, 95% confidence interval 2.72–9.27, three studies, 26,260 participants, I2 87%, low quality of evidence). We are very uncertain about the other outcomes (very-low quality of evidence). Conclusion: Informal economy workers may be less likely than formal economy workers to use any health services and more likely to have depression. The evidence is uncertain for relative differences in the other eligible outcomes. Further research is warranted to strengthen the current body of evidence and needed to improve population health and reduce health inequalities among workers.


Author(s):  
Patrícia Soares ◽  
Andreia Leite ◽  
Sara Esteves ◽  
Ana Gama ◽  
Pedro Almeida Laires ◽  
...  

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in changes in healthcare use. This study aimed to identify factors associated with a patient’s decision to avoid and/or delay healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used data from a community-based survey in Portugal from July 2020 to August 2021, “COVID-19 Barometer: Social Opinion”, which included data regarding health services use, risk perception and confidence in health services. We framed our analysis under Andersen’s Behavioural Model of Health Services Use and utilised Poisson regression to identify healthcare avoidance associated factors. Healthcare avoidance was high (44%). Higher prevalence of healthcare avoidance was found among women; participants who reported lower confidence in the healthcare system response to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19; lost income during the pandemic; experienced negative emotions due to physical distancing measures; answered the questionnaire before middle June 2021; and perceived having worse health, the measures implemented by the Government as inadequate, the information conveyed as unclear and confusing, a higher risk of getting COVID-19, a higher risk of complications and a higher risk of getting infected in a health institution. It is crucial to reassure the population that health services are safe. Health services should plan their recovery since delays in healthcare delivery can lead to increased or worsening morbidity, yielding economic and societal costs.


2004 ◽  
Vol 164 (19) ◽  
pp. 2135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marsha A. Raebel ◽  
Daniel C. Malone ◽  
Douglas A. Conner ◽  
Stanley Xu ◽  
Julie A. Porter ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document