Assessing Health Technology Literacy and Attitudes of Patients in an Urban Outpatient Psychiatry Clinic: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Jmir Mental Health Pub Date : 2024-12-30 DOI:10.2196/63034
Julia Tartaglia, Brendan Jaghab, Mohamed Ismail, Katrin Hänsel, Anna Van Meter, Michael Kirschenbaum, Michael Sobolev, John M Kane, Sunny X Tang
{"title":"Assessing Health Technology Literacy and Attitudes of Patients in an Urban Outpatient Psychiatry Clinic: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.","authors":"Julia Tartaglia, Brendan Jaghab, Mohamed Ismail, Katrin Hänsel, Anna Van Meter, Michael Kirschenbaum, Michael Sobolev, John M Kane, Sunny X Tang","doi":"10.2196/63034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Digital health technologies are increasingly being integrated into mental health care. However, the adoption of these technologies can be influenced by patients' digital literacy and attitudes, which may vary based on sociodemographic factors. This variability necessitates a better understanding of patient digital literacy and attitudes to prevent a digital divide, which can worsen existing health care disparities.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess digital literacy and attitudes toward digital health technologies among a diverse psychiatric outpatient population. In addition, the study sought to identify clusters of patients based on their digital literacy and attitudes, and to compare sociodemographic characteristics among these clusters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was distributed to adult psychiatric patients with various diagnoses in an urban outpatient psychiatry program. The survey included a demographic questionnaire, a digital literacy questionnaire, and a digital health attitudes questionnaire. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify predictors of digital literacy and attitudes. Cluster analysis was performed to categorize patients based on their responses. Pairwise comparisons and one-way ANOVA were conducted to analyze differences between clusters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 256 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age of participants was 32 (SD 12.6, range 16-70) years. The sample was racially and ethnically diverse: White (100/256, 38.9%), Black (39/256, 15.2%), Latinx (44/256, 17.2%), Asian (59/256, 23%), and other races and ethnicities (15/256, 5.7%). Digital literacy was high for technologies such as smartphones, videoconferencing, and social media (items with >75%, 193/256 of participants reporting at least some use) but lower for health apps, mental health apps, wearables, and virtual reality (items with <42%, 108/256 reporting at least some use). Attitudes toward using technology in clinical care were generally positive (9 out of 10 items received >75% positive score), particularly for communication with providers and health data sharing. Older age (P<.001) and lower educational attainment (P<.001) negatively predicted digital literacy scores, but no demographic variables predicted attitude scores. Cluster analysis identified 3 patient groups. Relative to the other clusters, cluster 1 (n=30) had lower digital literacy and intermediate acceptance of digital technology. Cluster 2 (n=50) had higher literacy and lower acceptance. Cluster 3 (n=176) displayed both higher literacy and acceptance. Significant between-cluster differences were observed in mean age and education level between clusters (P<.001), with cluster 1 participants being older and having lower levels of formal education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High digital literacy and acceptance of digital technologies were observed among our patients, indicating a generally positive outlook for digital health clinics. Our results also found that patients of older age and lower formal levels of educational attainment had lower digital literacy, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to support those who may struggle with adopting digital health tools.</p>","PeriodicalId":48616,"journal":{"name":"Jmir Mental Health","volume":"11 ","pages":"e63034"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11729776/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jmir Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/63034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Digital health technologies are increasingly being integrated into mental health care. However, the adoption of these technologies can be influenced by patients' digital literacy and attitudes, which may vary based on sociodemographic factors. This variability necessitates a better understanding of patient digital literacy and attitudes to prevent a digital divide, which can worsen existing health care disparities.

Objective: This study aimed to assess digital literacy and attitudes toward digital health technologies among a diverse psychiatric outpatient population. In addition, the study sought to identify clusters of patients based on their digital literacy and attitudes, and to compare sociodemographic characteristics among these clusters.

Methods: A survey was distributed to adult psychiatric patients with various diagnoses in an urban outpatient psychiatry program. The survey included a demographic questionnaire, a digital literacy questionnaire, and a digital health attitudes questionnaire. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify predictors of digital literacy and attitudes. Cluster analysis was performed to categorize patients based on their responses. Pairwise comparisons and one-way ANOVA were conducted to analyze differences between clusters.

Results: A total of 256 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age of participants was 32 (SD 12.6, range 16-70) years. The sample was racially and ethnically diverse: White (100/256, 38.9%), Black (39/256, 15.2%), Latinx (44/256, 17.2%), Asian (59/256, 23%), and other races and ethnicities (15/256, 5.7%). Digital literacy was high for technologies such as smartphones, videoconferencing, and social media (items with >75%, 193/256 of participants reporting at least some use) but lower for health apps, mental health apps, wearables, and virtual reality (items with <42%, 108/256 reporting at least some use). Attitudes toward using technology in clinical care were generally positive (9 out of 10 items received >75% positive score), particularly for communication with providers and health data sharing. Older age (P<.001) and lower educational attainment (P<.001) negatively predicted digital literacy scores, but no demographic variables predicted attitude scores. Cluster analysis identified 3 patient groups. Relative to the other clusters, cluster 1 (n=30) had lower digital literacy and intermediate acceptance of digital technology. Cluster 2 (n=50) had higher literacy and lower acceptance. Cluster 3 (n=176) displayed both higher literacy and acceptance. Significant between-cluster differences were observed in mean age and education level between clusters (P<.001), with cluster 1 participants being older and having lower levels of formal education.

Conclusions: High digital literacy and acceptance of digital technologies were observed among our patients, indicating a generally positive outlook for digital health clinics. Our results also found that patients of older age and lower formal levels of educational attainment had lower digital literacy, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to support those who may struggle with adopting digital health tools.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估城市精神病学门诊病人的卫生技术素养和态度:横断面调查研究。
背景:数字卫生技术正越来越多地融入精神卫生保健。然而,这些技术的采用可能受到患者数字素养和态度的影响,这可能因社会人口因素而异。这种可变性需要更好地了解患者的数字素养和态度,以防止可能加剧现有卫生保健差距的数字鸿沟。目的:本研究旨在评估不同精神科门诊人群的数字素养和对数字健康技术的态度。此外,该研究试图根据患者的数字素养和态度来确定他们的群体,并比较这些群体中的社会人口特征。方法:采用问卷调查的方法,对在某城市精神科门诊就诊的不同诊断的成年精神病患者进行调查。该调查包括人口调查问卷、数字素养调查问卷和数字健康态度调查问卷。多元线性回归分析用于确定数字素养和态度的预测因子。根据患者的反应进行聚类分析对患者进行分类。两两比较和单因素方差分析分析聚类之间的差异。结果:共纳入256例患者。参与者的平均年龄为32岁(标准差12.6,范围16-70岁)。样本的种族和民族多样化:白人(100/256,38.9%)、黑人(39/256,15.2%)、拉丁裔(44/256,17.2%)、亚洲人(59/256,23%)和其他种族和民族(15/256,5.7%)。智能手机、视频会议和社交媒体等技术的数字素养很高(bb0 75%的项目,193/256的参与者报告至少使用过一些),但健康应用程序、心理健康应用程序、可穿戴设备和虚拟现实(75%的项目)的数字素养较低,特别是与供应商的沟通和健康数据共享。结论:在我们的患者中观察到较高的数字素养和对数字技术的接受程度,表明数字健康诊所的总体前景是积极的。我们的研究结果还发现,年龄较大和受教育程度较低的患者的数字素养较低,这突出了有针对性的干预措施的必要性,以支持那些可能难以采用数字健康工具的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Jmir Mental Health
Jmir Mental Health Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
3.80%
发文量
104
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Mental Health (JMH, ISSN 2368-7959) is a PubMed-indexed, peer-reviewed sister journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR Mental Health focusses on digital health and Internet interventions, technologies and electronic innovations (software and hardware) for mental health, addictions, online counselling and behaviour change. This includes formative evaluation and system descriptions, theoretical papers, review papers, viewpoint/vision papers, and rigorous evaluations.
期刊最新文献
Patterns of Skills Review in Smartphone Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: Observational Study of Intervention Content Use. Exploring the Ethical Challenges of Conversational AI in Mental Health Care: Scoping Review. Multimodal Digital Phenotyping Study in Patients With Major Depressive Episodes and Healthy Controls (Mobile Monitoring of Mood): Observational Longitudinal Study. Toward a New Conceptual Framework for Digital Mental Health Technologies: Scoping Review. Digital Migration of the Loewenstein Acevedo Scales for Semantic Interference and Learning (LASSI-L): Development and Validation Study in Older Participants.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1