IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v13y2021i2p26-d486083.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrative Factors of E-Health Laboratory Adoption: A Case of Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Dwiza Riana

    (Magister of Computer Science, Sekolah Tinggi Manajemen Informatika dan Komputer Nusa Mandiri (STMIK Nusa Mandiri), Jakarta Timur 13620, Indonesia)

  • Achmad Nizar Hidayanto

    (Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia)

  • Sri Hadianti

    (Magister of Computer Science, Sekolah Tinggi Manajemen Informatika dan Komputer Nusa Mandiri (STMIK Nusa Mandiri), Jakarta Timur 13620, Indonesia)

  • Darmawan Napitupulu

    (Research Center for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy and Management, Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Jakarta 12710, Indonesia)

Abstract

Around the world, the adoption of digital health applications is growing very fast. The use of e-health laboratory systems is increasing while research on the factors that impact users to use e-health laboratory systems in Indonesia has not been done much. The objective of this study is to analyze the behavioral factors of e-health laboratory users. This study includes a survey conducted on Indonesian users, and data analysis was carried out thoroughly. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model, this research framework explores a combination of variables consisting of task-driven, technology-driven, human-driven, and adoption variables to form the model proposed in this study. This model was verified using the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) method for factor analysis, path analysis, and regression. A total of 163 respondents were collected to evaluate this research model empirically and the level of this study were individuals. These three problems are all essential in affecting usage intentions in adopting an e-health laboratory system. Specifically, task technology fit, information quality, and accessibility show a direct effect on both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use factors perceived by the user, and have an indirect influence on the adoption of an e-health laboratory system through these two factors. The design of an online laboratory system affects perceived ease of use and personal innovativeness factors affect the perceived usefulness that users feel when adopting a laboratory system, while task technology fit and personal innovativeness factors do not affect the perceived ease of use. However, overall technology characteristic and perceived usefulness followed by design are the main predictors of adopting an e-health laboratory system on e-health systems in Indonesia.

Suggested Citation

  • Dwiza Riana & Achmad Nizar Hidayanto & Sri Hadianti & Darmawan Napitupulu, 2021. "Integrative Factors of E-Health Laboratory Adoption: A Case of Indonesia," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:26-:d:486083
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/13/2/26/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/13/2/26/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John D'Ambra & Concepción S. Wilson & Shahriar Akter, 2013. "Application of the task‐technology fit model to structure and evaluate the adoption of E‐books by Academics," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 48-64, January.
    2. Peter B. Seddon, 1997. "A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 240-253, September.
    3. Puspa Sandhyaduhita & Haya Rizqi Fajrina & Ave Adriana Pinem & Achmad Nizar Hidayanto & Putu Handayani & Kasiyah Junus, 2016. "Hospital Service Quality from Patients Perspective: A Case of Indonesia," International Journal of E-Health and Medical Communications (IJEHMC), IGI Global, vol. 7(4), pages 48-61, October.
    4. DeLone, William H. & McLean, Ephraim R., 2016. "Information Systems Success Measurement," Foundations and Trends(R) in Information Systems, now publishers, vol. 2(1), pages 1-116, August.
    5. Saleh Alqatan & Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor & Mustafa Man & Rosmayati Mohemad, 2017. "A theoretical discussion of factors affecting the acceptance of m-commerce among SMTEs by integrating TTF with TAM," International Journal of Business Information Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 26(1), pages 66-111.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tai Abdulrahman Alshammari & Khalid Mhasan Alshammary & Fahad Maiyah Alshammari, 2022. "Impact of Perceived Quality of E-Health Services on Patient Behavioral Intention to Use E-Health Services: A Moderating Role of Knowledge of E-Health Management," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 14(1), pages 23-38.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Iannacci, Federico & Cornford, Tony, 2017. "Unravelling casual and temporal influences underpinning monitoring systems success: a typological approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84049, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Hamood Mohd. Al-Hattami, 2021. "Validation of the D&M IS success model in the context of accounting information system of the banking sector in the least developed countries," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 127-153, March.
    3. Melchor Gómez-García & Roberto Soto-Varela & Juan Agustín Morón-Marchena & María José del Pino-Espejo, 2020. "Using Mobile Devices for Educational Purposes in Compulsory Secondary Education to Improve Student’s Learning Achievements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-12, May.
    4. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    5. Abdesamad Zouine & Pierre Fenies, 2014. "The Critical Success Factors Of The ERP System Project: A Meta-Analysis Methodology," Post-Print hal-01419785, HAL.
    6. Landrum, Hollis & Prybutok, Victor R., 2004. "A service quality and success model for the information service industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(3), pages 628-642, August.
    7. Pan Gong & Ningshuang Zeng & Kunhui Ye & Markus König, 2019. "An Empirical Study on the Acceptance of 4D BIM in EPC Projects in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, March.
    8. Sanduni I. Senaratne & Samantha M. Samarasinghe, 2019. "Factors Affecting the Intention to Adopt M-Learning," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 150-164, February.
    9. Masoner, Michael M. & Lang, Sandra S. & Melcher, Arlyn J., 2011. "A meta-analysis of information system success: A reconsideration of its dimensionality," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 136-141.
    10. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & Fildes, Robert, 2002. "Influence of user participation on DSS use and decision accuracy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 381-392, October.
    11. Un-Kon Lee, 2017. "International Tourism Advertisements on Social Media: Impact of Argument Quality and Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Jung-Yu Lai & Juite Wang, 2018. "Exploring the impacts of perceived e-collaboration service convenience on new product development in Taiwanese IC design companies," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 107-120, June.
    13. Byrd, Terry Anthony & Thrasher, Evelyn H. & Lang, Teresa & Davidson, Nancy W., 2006. "A process-oriented perspective of IS success: Examining the impact of IS on operational cost," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 448-460, October.
    14. Oghuma, Apollos Patricks & Chang, Younghoon & Libaque-Saenz, Christian Fernando & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2015. "Benefit-confirmation model for post-adoption behavior of mobile instant messaging applications: A comparative analysis of KakaoTalk and Joyn in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 658-677.
    15. Liyong Wan & Shoumei Xie & Ai Shu, 2020. "Toward an Understanding of University Students’ Continued Intention to Use MOOCs: When UTAUT Model Meets TTF Model," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    16. Nurlia Dewi & Willy Abdillah & Muhartini Salim & Slamet Widodo, 2021. "The Role of Leadership in Implementation Public Information System of Local Government Institutions in Indonesia," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 1-9.
    17. A. Maes & G. Poels, 2006. "Development of a user evaluations based quality model for conceptual modeling," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/406, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    18. Fatma Fourati-Jamoussi & Claude Narcisse Niamba, 2016. "An evaluation of business intelligence tools: a cluster analysis of users’ perceptions," Post-Print hal-03165570, HAL.
    19. Bradley, Joseph, 2008. "Management based critical success factors in the implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning systems," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 175-200.
    20. Gjoko Stamenkov, 2023. "Recommendations for improving research quality: relationships among constructs, verbs in hypotheses, theoretical perspectives, and triangulation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 2923-2946, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:26-:d:486083. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.