Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors Affecting the Adoption of Telemedicine—A Multiple Adopter Perspective

  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper utilizes the diffusion of innovation framework to discuss factors affecting adoption of telemedicine. Empirical and anecdotal findings are organized across five attributes affecting innovation adoption rates for the following four adopter groups: physicians, patients, hospital administrators, and payers. A discussion of the implications is included.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Davis, S., What's holding up the telemedicine explosion? Telephony.online,pp.66–67, 1998.

  2. Muirhead, G., An update on telemedicine. Patient Care 34(6):96–109, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Marta, M. R., Telemedicine payment: Then and now. Healthc. Financ. Manage. 57(7):50–54, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Burke, D. E., Wang, B. B. L., Wan, T. T. H., and Diana, M. L., Exploring hospitals' adoption of information technology. J. Med. Syst. 26(4):349–355, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Friedman, L. H., and Goes, J. B., The timing of medical technology acquisition: Strategic decision making in turbulent environments. J. Healthc. Manage. 45(5):317–329, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rogers, E., Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn., The Free Press, New York, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Strode, S. W., Gustke, S., and Allen, A., Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. JAMA 281(12):1066–1068, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Austin, C., and Boxerman, S., Information Systems for Health Services Administration, 5th edn., Health Administration Press, Chicago, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burns, P., Telehealth or telehype? Some observations and thoughts on the current status and future of telehealth. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4, Winter):5–15, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Whitlock, W. L., Buker, K., Kruse, B., Pavliscscak, H., Rasche, J., and Mease, A. D., An enhanced healthcare platform via e-medicine. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4, Winter):111–120, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chepesiuk, R., Making house calls: Using telecommunications to bring health care into the home. Environ. Health Perspect. 107(11):556–560, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ferrer-Roca, O., Diaz De Leon, R. D., de Latorre, F. J., Suarez-Delgado, M., Di Persia, L., and Cordo, M., Aviation medicine: Challenges for telemedicine. J. Telemed. Telecare 8(1):1–4, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Essex, D., Hop on the bandwidth wagon. Healthc. Inform. November:44–52, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Papageorges, M., Telemedicine: What's in it for practitioners? DVM 29(9):32–34, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tweed, V., The brave new reality of telemedicine. Bus. Health 16(9):34–39, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gagnon, M. P., Godin, G., Gagne C., Fortin, J. P., Lamothe, L., Reinharz, D., Cloutier, A., An adap-tation of the theory of interpersonal behaviour to the study of telemedicine adoption by physicians. Int. J. Med. Inf. 71(2/3):103–115, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zollo, S., Kienzle, M., Loeffelholz, P., and Sebille, S., Telemedicine to Iowa's correctional facilities: Initial clinical experience and assessment of program costs. Telemed. J. 5(3):291–301, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Paul, D. L., Pearlson, K. E., and McDaniel, R. R., Assessing technological barriers to telemedicine: Technology-management implications. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 46(3):279–288, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sandberg, L. A., Telemedicine continues to wrestle wicked problems: Reimbursement, licensure, and bandwidth rules (or is it compliance?). Health Manage. Technol. 20(1):133–134, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tieman, J., Monitoring a good opportunity. Mod. Healthc. 3(43):75–82, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Anonymous. Claims Process Transmittal 1885, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003. Medicare Intermediary Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) Manual Centers for Medi-care & Medicaid Services (CMS), (Date: May 16, 2003)

  22. Anonymous. Medicaid and Telemedicine, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003.

  23. Anonymous. States Where Medicaid Reimbursement of Services Utilizing Telemedicine Is Available, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003.

  24. Strode, S. W., Gustke, S., and Allen, A., Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. JAMA 281(12):1066–1068, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Anonymous. Advice from the American Hospital Association. Health Manage. Technol. 21(10):12, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  26. NTIA. Telemedicine Report to Congress, 1997, National Telecommunications and Information Ad-ministration, Washington, DC, pp. 1–31, 1997.

  27. Huston, T. L., and Huston, J. L., Is telemedicine a practical reality? Association for Computing Machinery. Commun. ACM 43(6):91–95, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mair, F., and Whitten, P., Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. BMJ 320(7248):1517–1520, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Curtin, L., and Simpson, R., Telemedicine tangles with red tape. Health Manage. Technol. 20(10):46–47, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Allen, A., and Stein, S., Cost Effectiveness of Telemedicine, 2000, 2000. www.telemedicinetoday.com.

  31. Pal, B., Following up outpatients by telephone: Pilot study. BMJ 316(7145):1647, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Schooley, A. K., Allowing FDA regulations of communications software used in telemedicine: A potentially fatal diagnosis? Fed. Commun. Law J. 50(3):731–751, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Reich-Hale, D., Experts are divided on telemedicine privacy hazards. Natl. Underwriter 102(45):8, 13, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  34. Stone, T. H., Patient health information confidentiality in telehealth applications. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4):79–88, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Whitted, G. S., Medical technology diffusion and its effects on the modern hospital. Healthc. Manage. Rev. 6(2):45–54, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Brown, C. V., and Bostrom, R. P., Organizational designs for the management of end-user computing: Reexamining the contingencies. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 10:183–211, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Stensland, J., Speedie, S. M., Ideker, M., House, J., and Thompson, T., The relative cost of outpatient telemedicine services. Telemed. J. 5(3):245–256, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Meadows, M. T., and Davis, C., What works. Telemedicine team work cuts transfer costs and generates new revenue. Health Manage. Technol. 19(11):56, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Krupinski, E. A., LeSueur, B., Ellsworth, L., Levine, N., Hansen, R., Silvis, N., Sarantopoulos, P., Hite, P., Wurzel, J., Weinstein, R. S., Lopez, A. M., Diagnostic accuracy and image quality using a digital camera for teledermatology. Telemed. J. 5(3):257–263, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Li, M. F., and Ye, L. R., Information technology and firm performance: Linking with environmental, strategic and managerial contexts. Inf. Manage. 35(1):43–51, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Charles, B. L., Telemedicine can lower costs and improve access. Health Financ. Manage. 54(4):66–69, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mair, F., and Whitten, P., Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. BMJ 320(7248):1517–1520, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ferry, J., Virtual doctors on the horizon in Seattle. The Lancet p. 354926, 1999.

  44. Becker, C., Telemedicine system helps manage ICUs. Mod. Healthc. 30(37):62, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ruggiero, A., Teleradiology Primer, 2000, 2000. www.telemedtoday.com. 7-17-0200.

  46. Hawnaur, J., Recent advances: Diagnostic radiology. BMJ pp. 319168–319171, 1999.

  47. Lattimore, M. R., Jr., Astore-forward ophthalmic telemedicine case report from deployed U.S. Army Forces in Kuwait. Telemed. J. 5(3):309–313, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Garshnek, V., and Hassell, L. H., Evaluating telemedicine in a changing technological era. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4):39–47, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Amatayakul, M., Security and privacy in the health information age. MD Comput. November/ December:51–53, 1999.

  50. Sloan, F. A., Valvona, J., Perrin, J. M., and Adamache, K. W., Diffusion of surgical technology. An exploratory study. J. Health Econ. 5(1):31–61, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kaluzny, A. D., Innovation in health services: Theoretical framework and review of research. Health Serv. Res. 9(2):101–120, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lee, R. H., and Waldman, D. M., The diffusion of innovations in hospitals. J. Health Econ. 4(4):373–380, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Romeo, A. A., Wagner, J. L., and Lee, R. H., Prospective reimbursement and the diffusion of new technologies in hospitals. J. Health Econ. 3(1):1–24, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Baker, L. C., and Wheeler, S. K., Managed care and technology diffusion: The case of MRI. Health Aff. (Millwood.) 17(5):195–207, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Greer, A. L., Advances in the study of diffusion of innovations in Health Care Organizations. Milbank Memorial Fund, Quarterly 55:505–532, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Falas, T., Papadopoulos, G., and Stafylopatis, A., A review of decision support systems in telecare. J. Med. Syst. 27(4):347–356, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Medicine, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA

    Nir Menachemi

  2. School of Information Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 32306-2100, USA

    Darrell E. Burke

  3. School of Business, Department of Management, Marketing and ID, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA

    Douglas J. Ayers

Authors
  1. Nir Menachemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Darrell E. Burke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Douglas J. Ayers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Darrell E. Burke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Menachemi, N., Burke, D.E. & Ayers, D.J. Factors Affecting the Adoption of Telemedicine—A Multiple Adopter Perspective. Journal of Medical Systems 28, 617–632 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOMS.0000044964.49821.df

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOMS.0000044964.49821.df

Search

Navigation