iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://link.springer.com/doi/10.1007/s10209-012-0275-y
Older adults’ perceptions of usefulness of personal health records | Universal Access in the Information Society Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Older adults’ perceptions of usefulness of personal health records

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Electronic personal health records (PHRs) have the potential to both make health information more accessible to patients and function as a decision-support system for patients managing chronic conditions. Age-related changes in cognition may make traditional strategies of integrating and understanding existing (i.e., paper-based) health information more difficult for older adults. The centralized and integrated nature of health information, as well as the long-term tracking capabilities present in many PHRs, may be especially beneficial for older patients’ management of health. However, older adults tend to be late adopters of technology and may be hesitant to adopt a PHR if the benefits are not made clear (perceived usefulness). Toward the design of a useful PHR, a needs analysis was conducted to determine how people currently manage their health information, what they perceive as useful, and to identify any unmet needs. This paper describes two qualitative studies examining the health information needs of both younger and older adults. The first study used a 2-week diary methodology to examine everyday health questions or concerns, while the second study examined maintenance of health information and perceptions of PHRs through the use of a three-part interview. User’s perceptions of the usefulness of PHRs are provided as recommendations for the design of e-health technology, especially those targeted for older adult healthcare consumers. The results suggest that both older and younger adults would deem a PHR useful if it provides memory support in the form of reminders, provides tools to aid in comprehension of one’s health concerns, is interactive and provides automatic functions, and is highly accessible to authorized users, yet one’s information is kept secure and private.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tang, P.C., Ash, J.S., Bates, D.W., Overhage, J.M., Sands, D.Z.: Personal health records: efinitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers for adoption. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 13, 121–126 (2006). doi:10.1197/jamia.M2025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Markle Foundation: Connecting Americans to their Healthcare (Final Report). http://www.markle.org/sites/default/files/eis_exec_sum_final_0704.pdf. Accessed 7 Apr 2011 (2004)

  3. International Organization for Standardization: ISO/DTR 14292 Health Informatics—Personal Health Records: Definition, Scope, Context, and Global Variations of Use. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?ics1=35&ics2=240&ics3=80&csnumber=54568. Accessed 9 Sep 2011 (2011)

  4. AHIMA Personal Health Record Practice Council: Helping consumers select PHRs: questions and considerations for navigating an emerging market. J. AHIMA 77(10), 50–56 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. California Health Foundation: Consumers and Health Information Technology: A National Survey. http://www.chcf.org/~/media/Files/PDF/C/PDF%20ConsumersHealthInfoTechnologyNationalSurvey.pdf. Accessed 7 Apr 2011 (2010)

  6. Deloitte Center for Health Solutions: 2010 Survey of Health Care Consumers. http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_US/us/Industries/US-federal-government/center-for-health-solutions/health-care-consumerism/9873c90c77549210VgnVCM100000ba42f00aRCRD.htm. Accessed 7 Apr 2011 (2010)

  7. Fox, S: E-Patients with a Disability or Chronic Disease. Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/pdfs/EPatients_Chronic_Conditions_2007.pdf6. Accessed 3 Feb 2009 (2007)

  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Diabetes Fact Sheet. http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/ndfs_2011.pdf. Accessed 7 Apr 2011 (2011)

  9. Craik, F.I.M., Byrd, M.: Aging and cognitive deficits: the role of attentional resources. In: Craik, F.I.M., Trehub, S.E. (eds.) Aging and Cognitive Processes, pp. 191–211. Plenum, New York (1982)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Maylor, E.A.: Aging and forgetting in prospective memory and retrospective memory tasks. Psychol. Aging 8, 420–428 (1993). doi:10.1037/0882-7974.11.1.74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu, L.L., Park, D.C.: Technology and the promise of independent living for adults: a cognitive perspective. In: Charness, N., Schaie, K.W. (eds.) Impact of Technology on Successful Aging, pp. 270–274. Springer, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35, 982–1003 (1989). doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. International Organization for Standardization: ISO/DTR 14292: Guidance on Usability (1998)

  14. Chaffin, A.J., Maddux, C.D.: Accessibility accommodations for older adults seeking e-health information. J. Gerontol. Nurs. 33, 6–12 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Marchionini, G., Rimer, B.K., Wildemuth, B.: Evidence Base for Personal Health Record Usability Final Report to the National Cancer Institute. http://www.ils.unc.edu/phr/files/final%20report%20010307.pdf. Accessed 7 Apr 2011 (2007)

  16. Marziali, E.: The design and evaluation of e-health intervention programs for older adults. eHealth Int. J. 4, 6–13 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Siek, K., Kahn, D.U., Ross, S.E..: A usability inspection of medication management in three personal health applications. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) Human Centered Design, pp. 129–138. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Peters, K., Niebling, M., Slimmer, C., Green, T., Webb, J.M., Schumacher, R.: Usability Guidance for Improving the User Interface and Adoption of Online Personal Health Records. http://www.usercentric.com/publications/2009/02/02/google-health-vs-microsoft-healthvault-consumers-compare-online-personal-hea. Accessed 2 Feb 2010 (2009)

  19. Ma, Q., Liu, L.: The technology acceptance model: a meta-analysis of empirical findings. J. Orga. End User Comput. 16, 59–72 (2004). doi:10.4018/joeuc.2004010104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Melenhorst, A.S., Rogers, W.A., Bouwhuis, D.G.: Older adults’ motivated choice for technological innovation: evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psychol. Aging 21, 190–195 (2006). doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.1.190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Melenhorst, A.S., Rogers, W.A., Caylor, E.C.: The use of communication technologies by older adults: exploring the benefits from the user’s perspective. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, pp. 221–225 (2001)

  22. Angst, C., Agarwal, R., Downing, J.: An Empirical Examination of the Importance of Defining the PHR for Research and for Practice. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, Hilton, p 10 (2008)

  23. Morgan, D.L.: The Focus Group Guidebook: Focus Group Kit, vol. 1. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bolger, N., Davis, A., Rafaeli, E.: Diary methods: capturing life as it is lived. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 54, 579–616 (2003). doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Baddeley, A., Eysenck, M.W., Anderson, M.C.: Memory. Psychology Press, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kim, E., Mayani, A., Modi, S., Soh, C.B., Kim, Y.: Evaluation of patient-centered electronic health record to overcome digital divide. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2, 593–596 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Vetere, F., Davis, H., Gibbs, M., Howard, S.: The magic box and collage: responding to the challenge of distributed intergenerational play. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 67, 165–178 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Yarosh, S., Cuzzort, S., Müller, H., Abowd, G.D.: Developing a media space for remote synchronous parent-child interaction. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children IDC, vol. 09, pp. 97–105. doi:10.1145/1551788.1551806 (2009)

  29. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W.: Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Q. 27, 51–90 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Tang, P.C., Lansky, D.: The missing link: bridging the patient-provider health information gap. Health Aff. 24, 1290–1295 (2005). doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.5.1290

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a Google Research Award to Richard Pak.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Clemson University, 418 Brackett Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA

    Margaux M. Price & Richard Pak

  2. Google, Inc., 76, 9th Avenue, New York, NY, 10011, USA

    Hendrik Müller

  3. Google, Inc., 651 N. 34th St., Seattle, WA, 98103, USA

    Aideen Stronge

Authors
  1. Margaux M. Price
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard Pak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hendrik Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aideen Stronge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard Pak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Price, M.M., Pak, R., Müller, H. et al. Older adults’ perceptions of usefulness of personal health records. Univ Access Inf Soc 12, 191–204 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-012-0275-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-012-0275-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation