美国社区居家和非居家老年人的数字技术使用情况。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Journal of the American Medical Directors Association Pub Date : 2024-09-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105284
Wenting Peng MMedsc , Gangjiao Zhu MSc , Zengyu Chen MSN , Tianxue Hou MSN , Yuqian Luo MMedSc , Lihua Huang MSN , Jianfeng Qiao MSN , Yamin Li PhD
{"title":"美国社区居家和非居家老年人的数字技术使用情况。","authors":"Wenting Peng MMedsc ,&nbsp;Gangjiao Zhu MSc ,&nbsp;Zengyu Chen MSN ,&nbsp;Tianxue Hou MSN ,&nbsp;Yuqian Luo MMedSc ,&nbsp;Lihua Huang MSN ,&nbsp;Jianfeng Qiao MSN ,&nbsp;Yamin Li PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To examine (1) the prevalence of digital technology use, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use among community-dwelling older adults with or without homebound status and (2) the associations of digital technology use with homebound status.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Cross-sectional study.</div></div><div><h3>Setting and Participants</h3><div>We used the 2022 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) data that included 5510 community-dwelling older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Digital technology use was assessed using self-reported outcomes of the technological environment component of the NHATS, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use. Homebound status was measured with 4 mobility-related questions regarding the frequency, independence, and difficulties of leaving home. Survey-weighted, binomial logistic regression was used to examine the associations of 17 technological-related outcomes and homebound status.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, the prevalence of homebound older adults was 5.2% (95% CI, 4.4%–6.1%), representing an estimated 2,516,403 people. The prevalence of digital technology use outcomes varied according to homebound status. The prevalence of any technology used in homebound, semi-homebound, and non-homebound populations was 88.5%, 93.3%, and 98.5%, respectively. Compared with non-homebound older adults, semi-homebound older adults had lower odds of emailing (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.94), using the internet for any other reason (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49–0.99), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48–0.95), and handling insurance (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56–0.99); homebound older adults had lower odds of using a phone (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28–0.59), using any everyday technology (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38–0.89), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35–0.76), and handling insurance (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38–0.86).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and Implications</h3><div>Non-homebound older adults are more likely to use digital technology than those who are semi-homebound or homebound. Public health care providers should prioritize efforts to enhance digital inclusion to ensure that all older adults can benefit from the advantages of digital technology.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","volume":"25 11","pages":"Article 105284"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital Technology Use in US Community-Dwelling Seniors With and Without Homebound Status\",\"authors\":\"Wenting Peng MMedsc ,&nbsp;Gangjiao Zhu MSc ,&nbsp;Zengyu Chen MSN ,&nbsp;Tianxue Hou MSN ,&nbsp;Yuqian Luo MMedSc ,&nbsp;Lihua Huang MSN ,&nbsp;Jianfeng Qiao MSN ,&nbsp;Yamin Li PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To examine (1) the prevalence of digital technology use, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use among community-dwelling older adults with or without homebound status and (2) the associations of digital technology use with homebound status.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Cross-sectional study.</div></div><div><h3>Setting and Participants</h3><div>We used the 2022 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) data that included 5510 community-dwelling older adults.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Digital technology use was assessed using self-reported outcomes of the technological environment component of the NHATS, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use. Homebound status was measured with 4 mobility-related questions regarding the frequency, independence, and difficulties of leaving home. Survey-weighted, binomial logistic regression was used to examine the associations of 17 technological-related outcomes and homebound status.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, the prevalence of homebound older adults was 5.2% (95% CI, 4.4%–6.1%), representing an estimated 2,516,403 people. The prevalence of digital technology use outcomes varied according to homebound status. The prevalence of any technology used in homebound, semi-homebound, and non-homebound populations was 88.5%, 93.3%, and 98.5%, respectively. Compared with non-homebound older adults, semi-homebound older adults had lower odds of emailing (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.94), using the internet for any other reason (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49–0.99), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48–0.95), and handling insurance (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56–0.99); homebound older adults had lower odds of using a phone (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28–0.59), using any everyday technology (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38–0.89), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35–0.76), and handling insurance (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38–0.86).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and Implications</h3><div>Non-homebound older adults are more likely to use digital technology than those who are semi-homebound or homebound. Public health care providers should prioritize efforts to enhance digital inclusion to ensure that all older adults can benefit from the advantages of digital technology.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association\",\"volume\":\"25 11\",\"pages\":\"Article 105284\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525861024007060\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525861024007060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的研究(1)有无居家状态的社区老年人使用数字技术的普遍程度,包括信息和通信技术设备、日常技术使用和数字健康技术使用;(2)数字技术使用与居家状态的关联:横断面研究:我们使用了 2022 年全国健康与老龄化趋势研究(NHATS)的数据,其中包括 5510 名居住在社区的老年人:方法:使用NHATS技术环境部分的自我报告结果来评估数字技术的使用情况,包括信息和通信技术设备、日常技术使用和数字健康技术使用情况。居家状态是通过 4 个与行动相关的问题来衡量的,这些问题涉及离家的频率、独立性和困难程度。采用调查加权二项逻辑回归法研究了 17 项技术相关结果与居家状态之间的关联:总体而言,居家老年人的比例为 5.2%(95% CI,4.4%-6.1%),估计有 2,516,403 人。数字技术使用率因居家状况而异。居家、半居家和非居家人群使用任何技术的比例分别为 88.5%、93.3% 和 98.5%。与不居家的老年人相比,半居家的老年人使用电子邮件(OR,0.71;95% CI,0.53-0.94)、因任何其他原因使用互联网(OR,0.70;95% CI,0.49-0.99)、访问医疗机构(OR,0.68;95% CI,0.48-0.95)和办理保险(OR,0.75;95% CI,0.56-0.99);居家老年人使用电话(OR,0.41;95% CI,0.28-0.59)、使用任何日常技术(OR,0.58;95% CI,0.38-0.89)、看望医疗提供者(OR,0.52;95% CI,0.35-0.76)和办理保险(OR,0.57;95% CI,0.38-0.86)的几率较低:与半居家或居家的老年人相比,不居家的老年人更有可能使用数字技术。公共医疗服务提供者应优先考虑加强数字包容性,以确保所有老年人都能从数字技术的优势中受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Digital Technology Use in US Community-Dwelling Seniors With and Without Homebound Status

Objectives

To examine (1) the prevalence of digital technology use, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use among community-dwelling older adults with or without homebound status and (2) the associations of digital technology use with homebound status.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting and Participants

We used the 2022 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) data that included 5510 community-dwelling older adults.

Methods

Digital technology use was assessed using self-reported outcomes of the technological environment component of the NHATS, including information and communication technology devices, everyday technology use, and digital health technology use. Homebound status was measured with 4 mobility-related questions regarding the frequency, independence, and difficulties of leaving home. Survey-weighted, binomial logistic regression was used to examine the associations of 17 technological-related outcomes and homebound status.

Results

Overall, the prevalence of homebound older adults was 5.2% (95% CI, 4.4%–6.1%), representing an estimated 2,516,403 people. The prevalence of digital technology use outcomes varied according to homebound status. The prevalence of any technology used in homebound, semi-homebound, and non-homebound populations was 88.5%, 93.3%, and 98.5%, respectively. Compared with non-homebound older adults, semi-homebound older adults had lower odds of emailing (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.94), using the internet for any other reason (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49–0.99), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48–0.95), and handling insurance (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56–0.99); homebound older adults had lower odds of using a phone (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28–0.59), using any everyday technology (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38–0.89), visiting medical providers (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35–0.76), and handling insurance (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38–0.86).

Conclusions and Implications

Non-homebound older adults are more likely to use digital technology than those who are semi-homebound or homebound. Public health care providers should prioritize efforts to enhance digital inclusion to ensure that all older adults can benefit from the advantages of digital technology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
6.60%
发文量
472
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: JAMDA, the official journal of AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine, is a leading peer-reviewed publication that offers practical information and research geared towards healthcare professionals in the post-acute and long-term care fields. It is also a valuable resource for policy-makers, organizational leaders, educators, and advocates. The journal provides essential information for various healthcare professionals such as medical directors, attending physicians, nurses, consultant pharmacists, geriatric psychiatrists, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, social workers, and others involved in providing, overseeing, and promoting quality
期刊最新文献
Measurement Practice of Slow Gait Speed for Motoric Cognitive Risk Syndrome: A Systematic Review. Nursing Home Staffing Levels and Resident Characteristics in Larger Versus Smaller Chains. A Nursing Home Clinician Survey to Explain Gabapentinoid Increases. Value of eReaders to Mitigate Apathy and Reduce the Digital Divide in Long-Term Care Settings Frailty Risk Patterns and Mortality Prediction in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A 3-Year Longitudinal Study.
×
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