Use and Uptake of eHealth in General Practice: A Cross-Sectional Survey and Focus Group Study Among Health Care Users and General Practitioners
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Policy makers promote the use of eHealth to widen access to health care services and to improve the quality and safety of care. Nevertheless, the enthusiasm among policy makers for eHealth does not match its uptake and use. eHealth is defined in this study as "health services delivered or enhanced through the Internet and related information and communication technologies." OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate (1) the current use of eHealth in the Netherlands by general practitioners (GPs) and health care users, (2) the future plans of GPs to provide eHealth and the willingness of health care users to use eHealth services, and (3) the perceived positive effects and barriers from the perspective of GPs and health care users. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of a sample of Dutch GPs and members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel was conducted in April 2014. A pre-structured questionnaire was completed by 171 GPs (12% response) and by 754 health care users (50% response). In addition, two focus groups were conducted in June 2014: one group with GPs (8 participants) and one with health care users (10 participants). RESULTS: Three-quarters of Dutch GPs that responded to the questionnaire (67.3%, 115/171) offered patients the possibility of requesting a prescription via the Internet, and half of them offered patients the possibility of asking a question via the Internet (49.1%, 84/171). In general, they did intend to provide future eHealth services. Nonetheless, many of the GPs perceived barriers, especially concerning its innovation (eg, insufficient reliable, secure systems) and the sociopolitical context (eg, lack of financial compensation for the time spent on implementation). By contrast, health care users were generally not aware of existing eHealth services offered by their GPs. Nevertheless, half of them were willing to use eHealth services when offered by their GP. In general, health care users have positive attitudes regarding eHealth. One in five (20.6%, 148/718) health care users perceived barriers to the use of eHealth. These included concerns about the safety of health information obtained via the Internet (66.7%, 96/144) and privacy aspects (55.6%, 80/144). CONCLUSIONS: GPs and health care users have generally positive attitudes towards eHealth, which is a prerequisite for the uptake of eHealth. But, general practitioners in particular perceive barriers to using eHealth and consider the implementation of eHealth to be complex. This study shows that there is room for improving awareness of eHealth services in primary care. It will take some time before these issues are resolved and eHealth can be fully adopted.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Implementation of innovations, including eHealth, is difficult and progresses only slowly.
“Nowadays, it is common knowledge that implementation of innovations, including eHealth, is difficult and progresses only slowly [25-27].”
From Lessons Learned From a Living Lab on the Broad Adoption of eHealth in Primary Health Care (2018) · cites this paper as [26]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,557 · see citing works
Valente, T. W. (2003) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.gim.0000061743.67794.c4 · Cited by 20,555 · see citing works
Older Adults' Reasons for Using Technology while Aging in Place
Peek, S. T. M., Luijkx, K. G., Rijnaard, M. D., Nieboer, M. E., van der Voort, C. S., Aarts, S., van Hoof, J., Vrijhoef, H. J., & Wouters, E. (2015) · Gerontology · doi:10.1159/000430949 · Cited by 19,803 · see citing works
Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations
GREENHALGH, T., ROBERT, G., MACFARLANE, F., BATE, P., & KYRIAKIDOU, O. (2004) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.0887-378x.2004.00325.x · Cited by 7,448 · see citing works
Eysenbach, G. (2001) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3.2.e20 · Cited by 2,449 · see citing works
The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview
Black, A. D., Car, J., Pagliari, C., Anandan, C., Cresswell, K., Bokun, T., McKinstry, B., Procter, R., Majeed, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000387 · Cited by 1,442 · see citing works
What Is eHealth (3): A Systematic Review of Published Definitions
Oh, H., Jadad, A., Rizo, C., Enkin, M., Powell, J., & Pagliari, C. (2005) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.7.1.e1 · Cited by 1,015 · see citing works
Mair, F. S., May, C., O’Donnell, C., Finch, T., Sullivan, F., & Murray, E. (2012) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.11.099424 · Cited by 553 · cited 3× · see citing works
“From previous research, we know that the introduction of eHealth services is often seen as disruptive in relation to existing practice, rather than being supportive [2,3,12,13].”
What Is eHealth (4): A Scoping Exercise to Map the Field
Pagliari, C., Sloan, D., Gregor, P., Sullivan, F., Detmer, D., Kahan, J. P., Oortwijn, W., & MacGillivray, S. (2005) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.7.1.e9 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
Factors that influence public engagement with eHealth: A literature review
Hardiker, N. R., & Grant, M. J. (2010) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2010.10.017 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Digital Asthma Self-Management Interventions: A Systematic Review
Morrison, D., Wyke, S., Agur, K., Cameron, E. J., Docking, R. I., MacKenzie, A., McConnachie, A., Raghuvir, V., Thomson, N. C., & Mair, F. S. (2014) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2814 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Barriers to the up-take of telemedicine in Australia - a view from providers
Moffatt, J. J., & Eley, D. S. (2011) · Rural and Remote Health · doi:10.22605/rrh1581 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Hage, E., Roo, J. P., van Offenbeek, M. A., & Boonstra, A. (2013) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-19 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
On the trail of quality and safety in health care
Grol, R. P. T. M., Berwick, D. M., & Wensing, M. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39413.486944.ad · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Online Communication Between Doctors and Patients in Europe: Status and Perspectives
Santana, S., Lausen, B., Bujnowska-Fedak, M., Chronaki, C., Kummervold, P. E., Rasmussen, J., & Sorensen, T. (2010) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1281 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Bowes, P., Stevenson, F., Ahluwalia, S., & Murray, E. (2012) · British Journal of General Practice · doi:10.3399/bjgp12x658250 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Zanaboni, P., Scalvini, S., Bernocchi, P., Borghi, G., Tridico, C., & Masella, C. (2009) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-9-238 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
How Technology in Care at Home Affects Patient Self-Care and Self-Management: A Scoping Review
Peeters, J., Wiegers, T., & Friele, R. (2013) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph10115541 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citationeHealth Research and Healthcare Delivery
Curry, S. J. (2007) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.01.026 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
A study of general practitioners’ perspectives on electronic medical records systems in NHSScotland
Bouamrane, M.-M., & Mair, F. S. (2013) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-58 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Email consultations in general practice
Neville, R. G., Marsden, W., McCowan, C., Pagliari, C., Mullen, H., & Allison, F. (2004) · Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics · doi:10.14236/jhi.v12i4.128 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Is the role as gatekeeper still feasible? A survey among Dutch general practitioners
Wammes, J. J. G., Jeurissen, P., Verhoef, L. M., Assendelft, W. J., Westert, G. P., & Faber, M. J. (2014) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmu046 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Key factors influencing the implementation success of a home telecare application
Postema, T., Peeters, J. M., & Friele, R. D. (2012) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.12.003 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Self-citationInternet Services for Communicating With the General Practice: Barely Noticed and Used by Patients
Huygens, M., Vermeulen, J., Friele, R. D., van Schayck, O. C. P., de Jong, J. D., & de Witte, L. (2015) · Interactive Journal of Medical Research · doi:10.2196/ijmr.4245 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Self-citationConsumentenpanel Gezondheidszorg: basisrapport met informatie over het panel, 2009.
Rooijen, M. R.-V., & de Jong, J. (2009) · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Self-citationMurray, J., Majeed, A., Khan, M. S., Lee, J. T., & Nelson, P. (2011) · JRSM Short Reports · doi:10.1258/shorts.2011.011078 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Lizano‐Díez, I., Modamio, P., López-Calahorra, P., et al. (2014) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006177 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lessons Learned From a Living Lab on the Broad Adoption of eHealth in Primary Health Care
Swinkels, I. C. S., Huygens, M. W. J., Schoenmakers, T. M., Oude Nijeweme-D'Hollosy, W., van Velsen, L., Vermeulen, J., Schoone-Harmsen, M., Jansen, Y. J., van Schayck, O. C., Friele, R., et al. (2018) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.9110 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Self-citationDornan, L., Pinyopornpanish, K., Jiraporncharoen, W., Hashmi, A., Dejkriengkraikul, N., & Angkurawaranon, C. (2019) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2019/7341841 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Bartels, S. L., van Knippenberg, R. J. M., Dassen, F. C. M., Asaba, E., Patomella, A.-H., Malinowsky, C., Verhey, F. R. J., & de Vugt, M. E. (2019) · Internet Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2019.100283 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Devan, H., Godfrey, H., Perry, M., Hempel, D., Saipe, B., Hale, L., & Grainger, R. (2019) · Journal of Pain Research · doi:10.2147/jpr.s206539 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Content and format preferences of a depression prevention program: A study in perinatal women
Osma, J., Suso-Ribera, C., Martínez-Borba, V., & Barrera, A. Z. (2019) · Anales de Psicología · doi:10.6018/analesps.356051 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Choudhury, A., Asan, O., & Alelyani, T. (2022) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2021.3087083 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Subotic-Kerry, M., King, C., O'Moore, K., Achilles, M., & O'Dea, B. (2018) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/humanfactors.8913 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- Peeters, J. M., Krijgsman, J. W., Brabers, A. E., Jong, J. D. D., & Friele, R. D.
- Affiliations
- Nationaal ICT Instituut in de Zorg (NL)
- Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NL)
- Venue
- JMIR Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Published
- 2016-04-06
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e11
- ISSN
- 2291-9694 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4838754
- OpenAlex
- W2314372944
- Cited by
- 83
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 16.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- JMIR Medical Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Keywords
- e-health, general practice, general practitioners, health care users, patient privacy concerns, health information security, health care access, Netherlands
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
