Search

BackgroundeHealth is an application of information and communication technologies across the whole range of functions that affect health. The benefits of eHealth (eg, improvement of health care operational efficiency and quality of patient care) have previously been documented in the literature. Health care providers (eg, medical doctors) are the key driving force in pushing eHealth initiatives. Without their acceptance and actual use, those eHealth benefits would be unlikely to be reaped. ObjectiveTo identify and synthesize influential factors to health care providers’ acceptance of various eHealth systems. MethodsThis systematic literature review was conducted in four steps. The first two steps facilitated the location and identification of relevant articles. The third step extracted key information from those articles including the studies’ characteristics and results. In the last step, identified factors were analyzed and grouped in accordance with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). ResultsThis study included 93 papers that have studied health care providers’ acceptance of eHealth. From these papers, 40 factors were identified and grouped into 7 clusters: (1) health care provider characteristics, (2) medical practice characteristics, (3) voluntariness of use, (4) performance expectancy, (5) effort expectancy, (6) social influence, and (7) facilitating or inhibiting conditions. ConclusionsThe grouping results demonstrated that the UTAUT model is useful for organizing the literature but has its limitations. Due to the complex contextual dynamics of health care settings, our work suggested that there would be potential to extend theories on information technology adoption, which is of great benefit to readers interested in learning more on the topic. Practically, these findings may help health care decision makers proactively introduce interventions to encourage acceptance of eHealth and may also assist health policy makers refine relevant policies to promote the eHealth innovation.

BackgroundeHealth is a tool that may be used to facilitate responses to influenza pandemics. Prior to implementation of eHealth in the hospital setting, assessment of the organizational preparedness is an important step in the planning process. Including this step may increase the chance of implementation success. ObjectiveTo identify the preparedness issues in relation to implementation of eHealth for future influenza pandemics. MethodsOne hospital was selected in Australia for this study. We conducted 12 individual interviews to gather a rich data set in relation to eHealth preparedness in the context of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic at this major teaching hospital. These participants’ views were analyzed according to five main themes: (1) challenges in present practices or circumstances for pandemic responses, which indicates a need for change, (2) healthcare providers’ exposure to eHealth, (3) organizational technological capacity to support an IT innovation for medical practices, (4) resource preparedness, and (5) socio-cultural issues in association with eHealth implementation in response to a pandemic. ResultsThis article reports a subset of the issues identified during the case study. These issues include, for example, poor sharing of patient health records, poor protection of patient privacy, clinicians’ concerns about IT reliability and dissatisfaction with the software in use, clinicians’ concerns about IT’s impact on professional autonomy versus having inefficient IT support, and inefficient communication across departments in the form of consultation. ConclusionsBased on discussions with the participants and interpretation of their responses, we assessed the hospital’s preparedness status and also identified areas of deficiency. Accordingly, we suggest possible solutions for the areas in need of improvement to facilitate eHealth implementation’s success. The study results will also provide policymakers at national, state and local levels with insights to refine relevant public health policies for the planning and management of pandemics from the eHealth perspective.

: Objective: Tailored communication is necessary to address COVID?19 vaccine hesitancy and increase uptake. We aimed to understand the information needs, perceived benefits and barriers to COVID?19 vaccination of people prioritised, but hesitant to receive the vaccine. Method: In this qualitative study in Victoria, Australia (February?May 2021), we purposively sampled hesitant adults who were health or aged/disability care workers (n=20), or adults aged 18?69 with comorbidities or aged ?70 years (?prioritised adults?; n=19). We thematically analysed interviews inductively, then deductively organised themes within the World Health Organization Behavioural and Social Drivers of vaccination model. Two stakeholder workshops (n=12) explored understanding and preferences for communicating risks and benefits. We subsequently formed communication recommendations. Results: Prioritised adults and health and aged care workers had short? and long?term safety concerns specific to personal circumstances, and felt like ?guinea pigs?. They saw vaccination as beneficial for individual and community protection and travel. Some health and aged care workers felt insufficiently informed to recommend vaccines, or viewed this as outside their scope of practice. Workshop participants requested interactive materials and transparency from spokespeople about uncertainty. Conclusions and public health implications: Eleven recommendations address communication content, delivery and context to increase uptake and acceptance of COVID?19 vaccines., In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) identified vaccine hesitancy and refusal as one of the top 10 threats to global public health.[sup.1] As of October 2021, this warning has [...]

The burden of seasonal influenza disease in Australian children is substantial, especially for those with medical comorbidities including chronic cardiac, respiratory, neurological and immunosuppressive conditions. Influenza is more likely to [...]

Background Vaccine-preventable infections are generally well controlled in Australia. However, gaps in immunity can lead to outbreaks and are important to identify. Young adults are a highly mobile population and a potential source of imported infections. We aimed to evaluate anti- measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMR&V) IgG seroprevalence and explore factors relating to antibody seropositivity. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among students from a large Australian university to collect demographic, vaccination, infection and travel characteristics. Blood samples were collected to measure MMR&V seroprevalence. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with seropositivity. Results Among 804 university students, seroprevalence (positive or equivocal) for measles was 82.3% (95% CI 79.6–84.8%), mumps 79.5% (95% CI 76.7–82.3%), rubella 91.5% (95% CI 89.6–93.5%) and varicella 86.2% (95% CI 84.1–88.8%), with 452 (56.2%, 95% CI 52.8–59.6) seropositive to all four viruses. Varicella seropositivity was highest in the older birth cohort (born 1988–1991). Measles seropositivity was higher for international students compared to domestic students. Among international students, mumps seroprevalence was significantly lower than measles and rubella seroprevalence. International travel in the previous 12 months was reported by 63.1% of students, but only 18.2% of travellers reported seeking pre-travel health advice prior to most recent international travel. Conclusions Overall, this study suggests immunity to MMR&V is sub-optimal. We found the university student population to be highly mobile and unlikely to seek pre-travel advice; thus, they are a potential source of infection importation. The implementation of university immunization policies could address the gaps identified and our findings can inform the development of targeted vaccination campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]