Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR mHealth and uHealth (no longer under consideration since Dec 03, 2021)

Date Submitted: Jul 24, 2021
Open Peer Review Period: Jul 24, 2021 - Sep 18, 2021
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer-review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer-Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Factors Affecting Wearable ECG Device Adoption by General Practitioners for Atrial Fibrillation Screening: Cross-Sectional Study

  • YI Yao; 
  • Zhichao Li; 
  • Yi He; 
  • Yalin Zhang; 
  • Zhaoxia Guo; 
  • Yi Lei; 
  • Qian Zhao; 
  • Dongze Li; 
  • Zhi Zhang; 
  • Yonggang Zhang; 
  • Xiaoyang Liao

ABSTRACT

Background:

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a challenging cardiovascular disease worldwide. Wearable electrocardiograph devices (WEDs) have great potential to improve the detection rate of AF in primary care. However, the factors that influence general practitioners’ (GPs) perception and acceptance of WEDs are not well understood. These factors are very important for the usability of WEDs.

Objective:

To identify factors that influence the intention of GPs to utilize WEDs in a clinical setting to screen patients for AF.

Methods:

The research hypotheses and questionnaire items were designed and developed based on the extended unified theory of acceptance and technology (UTAUT) framework. We used stratified random sampling and obtained the data through an online survey. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the collected data.

Results:

A total of 1004 valid questionnaires from GPs across Sichuan province in China were collected. Three factors increased GPs' intention to utilize WEDs to screen patients for AF, including performance expectancy (β=0.121, P=0.004), social influence (β=0.356, P<0.001), and price perception (β=0.587, P<0.001). Perception risk (β=-0.059, P<0.001) decreased usage intention, while effort expectancy (β=-0.079, P=0.155) and facilitating conditions (β=-0.014, P=0.868) did not affect usage intention. Gender (β=-0.022, P=0.179), age (β=0.006, P=0.699), education level (β=-0.22, P=0.184) and training (β=0.007, P=0.69) were not significantly correlated with usage intention, and these four factors had no moderating effect on the path coefficients.

Conclusions:

GPs’ intention to utilize WEDs is affected by performance expectancy, price perception, perception risk and social influence. Health information technology companies should improve the usability and perception of WEDs for screening and carry out studies to provide evidence for the security of wearable devices. They should also focus on social influence and provide the devices at a reasonable price. Clinical Trial: This study is registered at www.chictr.org.cn (Identifier: CHiCTR1900021246).


 Citation

Please cite as:

Yao Y, Li Z, He Y, Zhang Y, Guo Z, Lei Y, Zhao Q, Li D, Zhang Z, Zhang Y, Liao X

Factors Affecting Wearable ECG Device Adoption by General Practitioners for Atrial Fibrillation Screening: Cross-Sectional Study

JMIR Preprints. 24/07/2021:32361

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.32361

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/32361

The author of this paper has made a PDF available, but requires the user to login, or create an account.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.

Advertisement