Holt Kamila Adellund, Karnoe Astrid, Overgaard Dorthe, Nielsen Sidse Edith, Kayser Lars, Røder Michael Einar, From Gustav
Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health, University College Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Section of Social Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Interact J Med Res. 2019 Apr 5;8(2):e8423. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.8423.
Digitalization of health services ensures greater availability of services and improved contact to health professionals. To ensure high user adoption rates, we need to understand the indicators of use and nonuse. Traditionally, these have included classic sociodemographic variables such as age, sex, and educational level. Electronic health literacy (eHL) describes knowledge, skills, and experiences in the interaction with digital health services and technology. With our recent introduction of 2 new multidimensional instruments to measure eHL, the eHL questionnaire (eHLQ) and the eHL assessment (eHLA) toolkit, eHL provides a multifaceted approach to understand use and nonuse of digital health solutions in detail.
The aim of this study was to investigate how users and nonusers of digital services differ with respect to eHL, in a group of patients with regular contact to a hospital outpatient clinic. Furthermore, to examine how usage and nonusage, and eHL levels are associated with factors such as age, sex, educational level, and self-rated health.
Outpatients were asked to fill out a survey comprising items about usage of digital services, including digital contact to general practitioner (GP) and communication via the national health portal sundhed.dk, the eHLQ, and the eHLA toolkit, as well as items on age, sex, education, and self-rated health. In total, 246 patients completed the survey. A Mann-Whitney test was used to test for differences between users and nonusers of digital services. Correlation tests described correlations between eHL scales (eHEALSs) and age, education, and self-rated health. A significance level of .0071 was used to reject the null hypothesis in relation to the eHEALSs and usage of digital services.
In total, 95.1% (234/246) of the participants used their personal digital ID (NemID), 57.7% (142/246) were in contact with their GPs electronically, and 54.0% (133/246) had used the national health portal (sundhed.dk) within the last 3 months. There were no differences between users and nonusers of sundhed.dk with respect to age, sex, educational level, and self-rated health. Users of NemID scored higher than nonusers in 6 of the 7 dimensions of eHLQ, the only one which did not differ was dimension 2: Understanding of health concepts and language. Sundhed.dk users had a higher score in all of the 7 dimensions except for dimension 4: Feel safe and in control. The eHLA toolkit showed that users of sundhed.dk and NemID had higher levels of eHL with regard to tools 2, 5, 6, and 7. Furthermore, users of sundhed.dk had higher levels of eHL with regard to tools 3 and 4.
Information about patients' eHL may provide clinicians an understanding of patients' reasons for not using digital health services, better than sociodemographic data or self-rated health.
医疗服务数字化可确保服务更易获取,并改善与医疗专业人员的联系。为确保高用户采用率,我们需要了解使用和不使用的指标。传统上,这些指标包括年龄、性别和教育水平等经典社会人口统计学变量。电子健康素养(eHL)描述了与数字健康服务和技术互动中的知识、技能和经验。随着我们最近引入两种新的多维工具来测量eHL,即电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)和电子健康素养评估(eHLA)工具包,eHL提供了一种多方面的方法来详细了解数字健康解决方案的使用和不使用情况。
本研究的目的是调查在一组经常与医院门诊接触的患者中,数字服务的使用者和非使用者在eHL方面有何不同。此外,研究使用和不使用情况以及eHL水平如何与年龄、性别、教育水平和自评健康等因素相关。
门诊患者被要求填写一份调查问卷,其中包括关于数字服务使用情况的项目,包括与全科医生(GP)的数字联系以及通过国家健康门户网站sundhed.dk进行的通信、eHLQ和eHLA工具包,以及关于年龄、性别、教育和自评健康的项目。共有246名患者完成了调查。使用Mann-Whitney检验来测试数字服务使用者和非使用者之间的差异。相关性检验描述了eHL量表(eHEALSs)与年龄、教育和自评健康之间的相关性。使用0.0071的显著性水平来拒绝关于eHEALSs和数字服务使用情况的零假设。
总共95.1%(234/246)的参与者使用了他们的个人数字身份(NemID),57.7%(142/246)通过电子方式与他们的全科医生联系,54.0%(133/246)在过去3个月内使用了国家健康门户网站(sundhed.dk)。在年龄、性别、教育水平和自评健康方面,sundhed.dk的使用者和非使用者之间没有差异。在eHLQ的7个维度中,NemID的使用者在6个维度上的得分高于非使用者,唯一没有差异的是维度2:对健康概念和语言的理解。除了维度4:感到安全和能掌控外,sundhed.dk的使用者在所有7个维度上的得分都更高。eHLA工具包显示,sundhed.dk和NemID的使用者在工具2、5、6和7方面的eHL水平较高。此外,sundhed.dk的使用者在工具3和4方面的eHL水平较高。
有关患者eHL的信息可能比社会人口统计学数据或自评健康状况更能让临床医生了解患者不使用数字健康服务的原因。