• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

数字健康服务使用者与非使用者之间的电子健康素养水平差异:一组门诊患者的探索性调查

Differences in the Level of Electronic Health Literacy Between Users and Nonusers of Digital Health Services: An Exploratory Survey of a Group of Medical Outpatients.

作者信息

Holt Kamila Adellund, Karnoe Astrid, Overgaard Dorthe, Nielsen Sidse Edith, Kayser Lars, Røder Michael Einar, From Gustav

机构信息

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.

出版信息

Interact J Med Res. 2019 Apr 5;8(2):e8423. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.8423.

DOI:10.2196/ijmr.8423
PMID:30950809
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6473204/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d47f/6473204/427a61147faf/ijmr_v8i2e8423_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d47f/6473204/5ca03a3aac72/ijmr_v8i2e8423_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d47f/6473204/427a61147faf/ijmr_v8i2e8423_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d47f/6473204/5ca03a3aac72/ijmr_v8i2e8423_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d47f/6473204/427a61147faf/ijmr_v8i2e8423_fig2.jpg
摘要

背景

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。

目的

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。

方法

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。

结果

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。

结论

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。

相似文献

1
Differences in the Level of Electronic Health Literacy Between Users and Nonusers of Digital Health Services: An Exploratory Survey of a Group of Medical Outpatients.数字健康服务使用者与非使用者之间的电子健康素养水平差异:一组门诊患者的探索性调查
Interact J Med Res. 2019 Apr 5;8(2):e8423. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.8423.
2
Health literacy, digital literacy and eHealth literacy in Danish nursing students at entry and graduate level: a cross sectional study.丹麦本科及研究生阶段护理专业学生的健康素养、数字素养和电子健康素养:一项横断面研究。
BMC Nurs. 2020 Apr 10;19:22. doi: 10.1186/s12912-020-00418-w. eCollection 2020.
3
Serbian Version of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation Study Among Primary Health Care Users.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)塞尔维亚语版:初级卫生保健用户翻译、文化调适和验证研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 9;26:e57963. doi: 10.2196/57963.
4
Validity Evidence Based on Relations to Other Variables of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): Bayesian Approach to Test for Known-Groups Validity.基于与其他变量关系的电子健康素养问卷 (eHLQ) 的有效性证据:用于检验已知组有效性的贝叶斯方法。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 14;23(10):e30243. doi: 10.2196/30243.
5
Relationships Between Mobile eHealth Literacy, Diabetes Self-care, and Glycemic Outcomes in Taiwanese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Cross-sectional Study.**标题**:台湾 2 型糖尿病患者的移动电子健康素养、自我护理与血糖控制结局之间的关系:一项横断面研究。
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Feb 5;9(2):e18404. doi: 10.2196/18404.
6
Validity Testing and Cultural Adaptation of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) Among People With Chronic Diseases in Taiwan: Mixed Methods Study.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)在台湾慢性病患者中的有效性检验和文化调适:混合方法研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jan 19;24(1):e32855. doi: 10.2196/32855.
7
The Effect of Mobile eHealth Education to Improve Knowledge, Skills, Self-Care, and Mobile eHealth Literacies Among Patients With Diabetes: Development and Evaluation Study.移动电子健康教育对提高糖尿病患者知识、技能、自我护理和移动电子健康素养的影响:开发和评估研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Dec 6;25:e42497. doi: 10.2196/42497.
8
Assessing Competencies Needed to Engage With Digital Health Services: Development of the eHealth Literacy Assessment Toolkit.评估参与数字健康服务所需的能力:电子健康素养评估工具包的开发。
J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 10;20(5):e178. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8347.
9
Who uses physician-rating websites? Differences in sociodemographic variables, psychographic variables, and health status of users and nonusers of physician-rating websites.谁会使用医生评级网站?医生评级网站的用户和非用户在社会人口统计学变量、心理特征变量及健康状况方面的差异。
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Mar 31;16(3):e97. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3145.
10
A Multidimensional Tool Based on the eHealth Literacy Framework: Development and Initial Validity Testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ).基于电子健康素养框架的多维工具:电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)的开发与初始效度测试
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Feb 12;20(2):e36. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8371.

引用本文的文献

1
eHealth Literacy and Health-Related Internet Use Among Swedish Primary Health Care Visitors: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.瑞典初级卫生保健就诊者的电子健康素养与健康相关互联网使用情况:横断面问卷调查研究
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Dec 5;8:e63288. doi: 10.2196/63288.
2
Health and eHealth Literacy of Patients With Diabetes in Low-Income Countries: Perspective From Guinea and Burkina Faso.低收入国家糖尿病患者的健康与电子健康素养:来自几内亚和布基纳法索的视角
JMIR Diabetes. 2024 Dec 3;9:e55677. doi: 10.2196/55677.
3
Facilitators and challenges of implementing a digital patient education programme for rheumatoid arthritis into clinical practice.

本文引用的文献

1
The Measurements and an Elaborated Understanding of Chinese eHealth Literacy (C-eHEALS) in Chronic Patients in China.中国慢性病患者的电子健康素养(C-eHEALS)的测量与深入理解。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 23;15(7):1553. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15071553.
2
Assessing Competencies Needed to Engage With Digital Health Services: Development of the eHealth Literacy Assessment Toolkit.评估参与数字健康服务所需的能力:电子健康素养评估工具包的开发。
J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 10;20(5):e178. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8347.
3
A Multidimensional Tool Based on the eHealth Literacy Framework: Development and Initial Validity Testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ).
将类风湿关节炎数字患者教育方案融入临床实践的促进因素和挑战。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Sep 20;24(1):1104. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11597-6.
4
eHealth Literacy and the Use of NHS 111 Online Urgent Care Service in England: Cross-Sectional Survey.电子健康素养与英格兰 NHS111 在线紧急护理服务的使用:横断面调查。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Jun 4;26:e50376. doi: 10.2196/50376.
5
Spanish and Catalan Versions of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation Study.电子健康素养问卷的西班牙语和加泰罗尼亚语版本:翻译、跨文化调适和验证研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 10;26:e49227. doi: 10.2196/49227.
6
From office to digital primary care services: analysing income-related inequalities in utilization.从办公室到数字初级保健服务:分析利用方面的与收入相关的不平等。
Int J Equity Health. 2024 Apr 30;23(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12939-024-02184-6.
7
Evaluation of an mHealth App on Self-Management of Osteoporosis: Prospective Survey Study.一款移动健康应用程序对骨质疏松症自我管理的评估:前瞻性调查研究。
Interact J Med Res. 2024 Apr 1;13:e53995. doi: 10.2196/53995.
8
Association between digital health literacy and physical activity levels among individuals with and without long-term health conditions: Data from a cross-sectional survey of 19,231 individuals.有长期健康问题和无长期健康问题个体的数字健康素养与身体活动水平之间的关联:来自对19231名个体的横断面调查数据
Digit Health. 2024 Feb 25;10:20552076241233158. doi: 10.1177/20552076241233158. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
9
Assessment Tools for Measuring Health Literacy and Digital Health Literacy in a Hospital Setting: A Scoping Review.医院环境中测量健康素养和数字健康素养的评估工具:一项范围综述
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Dec 20;12(1):11. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12010011.
10
Facilitators and barriers to blood pressure telemonitoring: A mixed-methods study.血压远程监测的促进因素和障碍:一项混合方法研究。
Digit Health. 2023 Jul 25;9:20552076231187585. doi: 10.1177/20552076231187585. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
基于电子健康素养框架的多维工具:电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)的开发与初始效度测试
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Feb 12;20(2):e36. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8371.
4
Patterns and Correlates of Internet Use, Cell Phone Use, and Attitudes Toward Patient Portals Among a Predominantly Mexican-American Clinic Population.以主要为墨西哥裔美国人的诊所人群为对象的互联网使用、手机使用模式及对患者门户的态度及其相关因素。
Telemed J E Health. 2018 Nov;24(11):861-869. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2017.0266. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
5
Perceived value of eHealth among people living with multimorbidity: a qualitative study.患有多种疾病的人群对电子健康的感知价值:一项定性研究。
J Comorb. 2017 Aug 24;7(1):96-111. doi: 10.15256/joc.2017.7.98. eCollection 2017.
6
Engaging older people in an internet platform for cardiovascular risk self-management: a qualitative study among Dutch HATICE participants.让老年人参与心血管风险自我管理的互联网平台:对荷兰HATICE参与者的定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 21;8(1):e019683. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019683.
7
eHealth literacy research-Quo vadis?电子健康素养研究——何去何从?
Inform Health Soc Care. 2018 Dec;43(4):427-442. doi: 10.1080/17538157.2017.1364247. Epub 2017 Oct 18.
8
Ill Literates or Illiterates? Investigating the eHealth Literacy of Users of Online Health Communities.文盲还是健康知识匮乏者?探究在线健康社区用户的电子健康素养
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Oct 4;19(10):e331. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7372.
9
Web-based Health Information Seeking and eHealth Literacy among Patients Living with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).基于网络的健康信息搜索和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的电子健康素养。
Health Commun. 2018 Dec;33(12):1410-1424. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2017.1353868. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
10
Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses.对心血管风险中等到高的人群进行电子健康素养量表和健康素养量表的测评:拉施分析
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 27;12(4):e0175372. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175372. eCollection 2017.