All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

The Anticipated Positive Psychosocial Impact of Present Web-Based E-Health Services and Future Mobile Health Applications: An Investigation among Older Swedes

DOI: 10.1155/2013/509198

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


This study investigates the anticipated psychosocial impact of present web-based e-health services and future mobile health applications among older Swedes. Random sample’s of Swedish citizens aged 55 years old and older were given a survey containing two different e-health scenarios which respondents rated according to their anticipated psychosocial impact by means of the PIADS instrument. Results consistently demonstrated the positive anticipation of psychosocial impacts for both scenarios. The future mobile health applications scored more positively than the present web-based e-health services. An increase in age correlated positively to lower impact scores. These findings indicate that from a psychosocial perspective, web-based e-health services and mobile health applications are likely to positively impact quality of life. This knowledge can be helpful when tailoring and implementing e-health services that are directed to older people. 1. Introduction The world is facing an increasingly aging population which is presently placing heavy demand on health care services, and this continues into the future [1]. There are growing expectations that e-health will be the solution for these demands. E-health refers to “tools and services using information and communication technologies (ICTs) that can improve prevention, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and management and can benefit the entire community by improving access to care and quality of care and by making the health sector more efficient” [2]. The goal is to make e-health both more user-friendly and thus more widely accepted by involving patients in strategy, design, and implementation, as well as supporting the general increase in quality of life [2, 3]. European countries, such as Norway, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and Portugal, show steady development in using the Internet as a source for health information [4]. In Sweden, it is possible for citizens nationwide to use web-based e-health services offered by Swedish public health care providers to receive general e-health information online [5], receive personalized web-based e-health services (e.g., online e-prescription renewal), ask their doctors questions online, obtain medical devices, and reschedule doctor appointments [6, 7]. The next generation of e-health systems is mobile health applications that are “considered as the strongest contribution for the next generation e-health systems” [8]. These applications act closely with an individual and “focus on serving the needs of the user by providing widespread access to relevant information


[1]  European Commission, “The 2012 ageing report, “ European Commission Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs,”
[2]  European Commission, 2013,
[3]  European Commission, EHealth Action Plan 2012–2020—Innovative Healthcare For the 21st Century, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium, 2012.
[4]  P. E. Kummervold and R. Wynn, “Health information accessed on the internet: the development in 5 european countries,” International Journal of Telemedicine and Applications, vol. 2012, Article ID 297416, 3 pages, 2012.
[5]  The Swedish Parliament, “eHealth—benefits and business potential,” Tech. Rep. 2011/12:RFR5, 2011/12, Riksdagstryckeriet, Stockholm, Sweden, 2012.
[6]  Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, “National eHealth—the strategy for accessible and secure information in health and social care,” Tech. Rep. S2011.023, Government offices of Sweden, 2010.
[7]  M. L. Jung and K. Loria, “Acceptance of Swedish e-health Services,” Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, vol. 3, pp. 55–63, 2010.
[8]  B. M. C. Silva, J. J. P. C. Rodrigues, I. M. C. Lopes, T. M. F. Machado, and L. Zhou, “A Novel Cooperation Strategy for Mobile Health Applications,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications/Supplement, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 28–36, 2013.
[9]  G. Demiris, L. B. Afrin, S. Speedie et al., “Patient-centered applications: use of information technology to promote disease management and wellness. A white paper by the AMIA knowledge in motion working Group,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 8–13, 2008.
[10]  Z. Gabriel and A. Bowling, “Quality of life from the perspectives of older people,” Ageing and Society, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 675–691, 2004.
[11]  R. Steele, A. Lo, C. Secombe, and Y. K. Wong, “Elderly persons' perception and acceptance of using wireless sensor networks to assist healthcare,” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 78, no. 12, pp. 788–801, 2009.
[12]  A. Walker, “A European perspective on quality of life in old age,” European Journal of Ageing, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 2–12, 2005.
[13]  A. Melander‐Wikman, Y. F?ltholm, and G. Gard, “Safety vs. privacy: elderly persons’experiences of a mobile safety alarm,” Health & Social Care in the Community, vol. 16, pp. 337–346, 2008.
[14]  J. Jutai and H. Day, “Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS),” Technology and Disability, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 107–111, 2002.
[15]  T. Obia, D. Ishmatovab, and N. Iwasakic, “Promoting ICT innovations for the ageing population in Japan,” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 82, pp. e47–e62, 2013.
[16]  M. Cartwright, “Effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over 12 months (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested study of patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial,” British Medical Journal, vol. 346, no. 26, article f653, 2013.
[17]  K. Renaud and J. Van Biljon, “Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: a qualitative study,” in Proceedings of the Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries: Riding the Wave of Technology, pp. 210–219, October 2008.
[18]  A.-S. Melenhorst, W. A. Rogers, and D. G. Bouwhuis, “Older adults' motivated choice for technological innovation: evidence for benefit-driven selectivity,” Psychology and Aging, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 190–195, 2006.
[19]  S. Wiklund Axelsson, A. Melander Wikman, A. N?slund, and L. Nyberg, “Older people's health-related ICT-use in Sweden,” Gerontechnology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 36–43, 2013.
[20]  Swedish Population Register, SPAR, 2013,
[21]  B. Bergvall-Kaareborn, D. Howcroft, A. St?hlbr?st, and A. Melander Wikman, “Participation in living lab: designing systems with users,” in Human Benefit Through the Diffusion of Information Systems Design Science Research, J. Pries-Heje, J. J. Venable, D. Bunker, N. L. Russo, and J. I. DeGross, Eds., vol. 318, pp. 317–326, Springer, 2010.
[22]  B. Bergwall-K?reborn, T. Ghaye, and A. Melander Wikman, “A model for reflective participatory design. ” The importance of participation, voice and space when designing systems with users,” 2013.
[23]  M. Jarke, X. Tung Bui, and J. M. Carroll, “Scenario management: an interdisciplinary approach,” Requirements Engineering, vol. 3, no. 3-4, pp. 155–173, 1998.
[24]  H. Day and J. Jutai, Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS) Manual, University of Western Ontario, Ontario, Canada, 2003.
[25]  H. Day and J. Jutai, “Measuring the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: the PIADS,” Canadian Journal of Rehabilitation, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 159–168, 1996.
[26]  J. Jutai, “Quality of life impact of assistive technology,” Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 14, pp. 2–6, 1999.
[27]  H. Day, J. Jutai, and K. A. Campbell, “Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead,” Disability and Rehabilitation, vol. 24, no. 1–3, pp. 31–37, 2002.
[28]  R. Brooks, R. Rabin, and F. de Charro, The Measurement and Valuation of Health Status Using EQ-5D: A European Perspective-Evidence From the EuroQol BIOMED Research Program, Kluwer, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003.
[29]  B. Dawson, R. G. Trapp, and R. G. Trapp, Basic & Clinical Biostatistics, Lange Medical Books/McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
[30]  Internet use in household and by individuals, 2012,
[31]  O. Findahl, “Swedes and the internet 2012,” Tech. Rep. 1, internetstatistik, Stockholm, Sweden, 2012.
[32]  S. Bell and V. Menec, “You Don’t Want to Ask for the Help‘ the imperative of independence is it related to social exclusion?’,” Journal of Applied Gerontology, 2013.
[33]  A. Bowes and G. McColgan, “Telecare for older people promoting independence, participation, and identity,” Research on Aging, vol. 35, pp. 32–49, 2013.
[34]  K. Arning, A. Holzinger, and K. Miesenberger, “Different perspectives on technology acceptance: the role of technology type and age,” HCI and Usability for E-Inclusion, vol. 5889, article 20, 2009.
[35]  E. Hernández-Encuentra, M. Pousada, and B. Gómez-Zúniga, “ICT and older people: beyond usability,” Educational Gerontology, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 226–245, 2009.
[36]  E. D. Mynatt, A.-S. Melenhorst, A. D. Fisk, and W. A. Rogers, “Aware technologies for aging in place: understanding user needs and attitudes,” IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 36–41, 2004.
[37]  G. Demiris, M. J. Rantz, M. A. Aud et al., “Older adults attitudes towards and perceptions of 'smart home technologies: a pilot study,” Informatics for Health and Social Care, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 87–94, 2004.
[38]  J. F. Coughlin, “Older adult perceptions of smart home technologies: implications for research, policy market innovations in healthcare,” in Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMB Cité Internationale, pp. 1810–1815, Lyon, France, 2007.
[39]  I. Plaza, L. Martín, S. Martin, and C. Medrano, “Mobile applications in an aging society: status and trends,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 84, no. 11, pp. 1977–1988, 2011.
[40]  H. Buysse, G. De Moor, P. Coorevits, G. Van Maele, J. Kaufman, and J. Ruige, “Main characteristics of type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients interested in the use of a telemonitoring platform,” Journal of Nursing and Healthcare of Chronic Illness, vol. 3, pp. 456–468, 2011.
[41]  K. V. Wild, N. C. Mattek, S. A. Maxwell, H. H. Dodge, H. B. Jimison, and J. A. Kaye, “Computer-related self-efficacy and anxiety in older adults with and without mild cognitive impairment,” Alzheimer's & Dementia, vol. 8, pp. 544–552, 2012.
[42]  I. Pettersson, G. Ahlstr?m, and K. T?rnquist, “The value of an outdoor powered wheelchair with regard to the quality of life of persons with stroke: a follow-up study,” Assistive Technology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 143–153, 2007.
[43]  J. Jutai, P. Rigby, S. Ryan, and S. Stickel, “Psychosocial impact of electronic aids to daily living,” Assistive Technology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 123–131, 2000.
[44]  R. DeRosier and R. S. Farber, “Speech recognition software as an assistive device: a pilot study of user satisfaction and psychosocial impact,” Work, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 125–134, 2005.
[45]  L. Demers, R. Weiss-Lambrou, and B. Ska, “The Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): an overview and recent progress,” Technology and Disability, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 101–105, 2002.
[46]  M. J. Scherer and G. Craddock, “Matching Person & Technology (MPT) assessment process,” Technology and Disability, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 125–131, 2002.
[47]  J. M. Brick and D. Williams, “Explaining rising nonresponse rates in cross-sectional surveys,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 645, pp. 36–59, 2013.
[48]  R. M. Groves, “Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys,” Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 646–675, 2006.


comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us


微信:OALib Journal