E-Healthcare Adoption, User Satisfaction, and Clinical Effectiveness

المؤلفون

  • Ahmed Hamid Saleh المؤلف
  • Ahmed Sabeeh Yousif المؤلف

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59992/IJCI.2026.v5n3p1

الكلمات المفتاحية:

Telemedicine، Digital health، E-Healthcare Adoption، Patient Satisfaction، Mixed methods، Clinical Effectiveness

الملخص

Background: E-healthcare, telemedicine, and online health platforms are being increasingly employed to facilitate greater access to healthcare services. Nevertheless, there remains a need to generate real-world evidence for e-healthcare utilization, patient satisfaction, and outcomes from diverse geographic regions across the world. Objective: To identify the factors that determine e-healthcare utilization and patient satisfaction, as well as to determine if certain clinical outcomes from e-healthcare utilization are non-inferior to traditional healthcare, a mixed-methods approach was employed across diverse global regions. Methods: A total of 100 patient survey respondents, 167 patients for clinical outcomes, and 7 healthcare provider interviews were conducted over a period of 24 months in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. Quantitative methods employed multivariable logistic regression, non-inferiority propensity score matching, and survival analyses. Qualitative methods employed thematic content analysis. Results: Of the total survey respondents (n = 102), the mean age was 48.3 years (SD = 14.2), with a retention rate of 74.2% (n = 76) for 12 months or longer. Determinants for e-healthcare utilization were digital literacy (OR = 2.34; CI = 1.89, 2.91) and convenience (OR = 2.18; CI = 1.76, 2.70). The mean patient satisfaction score was 8.4 (SD = 1.2) out of a possible 10, with a major predictor for satisfaction being trust for the provider (β = 0.62; p < 0.001). Non-inferiority tests for clinical outcomes for e-healthcare utilization compared to traditional healthcare for diabetes, hypertension, and mental health showed non-inferiority for e-healthcare utilization. For diabetes, the differences in HbA1c for e-healthcare compared to traditional healthcare were -0.15% (CI -0.38% to +0.08%) with a non-inferiority margin of -0.5%. Hypertension control was achieved in 95.8% vs. 94.2% (p = 0.002), while improvement in depressive symptoms was by 7.2 vs. 6.8 on the PHQ-9 (p = 0.156). Acute care utilization was reduced by 23% for e-healthcare (38 per 1,000 vs. 49 per 1,000 (p < 0.001)). Three major challenges for e-healthcare utilization were training needs, interoperability, and reimbursement policy.

السير الشخصية للمؤلفين

  • Ahmed Hamid Saleh

    Department of Business Management Technology Management, Technical College of Management/Mosul, Northern Technical University, Mosul, 41001, Iraq

  • Ahmed Sabeeh Yousif

    Department of Information Technology Management, Technical College of Management /Mosul, Northern Technical University, Mosul, 41001, Iraq

المراجع

[1] World Health Organization. Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025. (2021). https://www.who.int/docs/defaultsource/documents/gs4dhdaa2a9f352b0445bafbc79ca799dce4d.pdf

[2] HL7International.FHIR overview. (n.d.) https://www.hl7.org/fhir/overview.html

[3] U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Telehealth privacy and security tips for patients(2023).https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for professionals/privacy/ guidance/ telehealth-privacy-security/index.html

[4] Tuckson, R. V., Edmunds, M., & Hodgkins, M. L. (2017). Telehealth. New England Journal of Medicine, 377(16), 1585–1592. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1503323

[5] Hagi, K., et al. (2023). Telepsychiatry versus face-to-face treatment: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 223(3), 407–414. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2023.86

[6] Hubley, S., Lynch, S. B., Schneck, C., Thomas, M., & Shore, J. (2016). Review of key telepsychiatry outcomes. World Journal of Psychiatry, 6(2), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v6.i2.269

[7] Alakeel A N, Alskait B K, Binshafi G B, et al. (2025) The Impact of Telehealth Adoption on Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Cureus 17(10): e94328. doi:10.7759/cureus.94328.

[8] Saeed, S. A., & Masters, R. M. (2021). Disparities in health care and the digital divide. Current Psychiatry Reports, 23(9), 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-021-01274-4

[9] Flodgren, G., Rachas, A., Farmer, A. J., Inzitari, M., & Shepperd, S. (2015). Interactive telemedicine: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9), CD002098. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002098.pub2

[10] Inglis, S. C., Clark, R. A., Dierckx, R., Prieto-Merino, D., & Cleland, J. G. F. (2015). Structured telephone support or non-invasive telemonitoring for patients with heart failure. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (10), CD007228. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007228.pub3

[11] Sinan ÇAVUŞOĞLU et al. (2025). UTAUT model the adoption of augmented and virtual reality technologies in the context of the UTAUT model and behavioral intention. https://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.8443.2025

[12] Kruse, C. S., Karem, P., Shifflett, K., Vegi, L., Ravi, K., & Brooks, M. (2018). Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: A systematic review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 24(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16674087

[13] Shi Yun Low, Stephanie Qianwen Ko and Ian Yi Han Ang (2025),Health Care Providers’ Experiences and Perceptions With Telehealth Tools in a Hospital-at-Home Program: Mixed Methods Study, https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/56860.

[14] Nima S. Hejazi, Mark J. van der Laan (2023), Revisiting the propensity score's central role: Towards bridging balance and efficiency in the era of causal machine learning. https://doi.org/10.1353/obs.2023.0001

التنزيلات

منشور

2026-03-15

إصدار

القسم

المقالات

كيفية الاقتباس

Ahmed Hamid Saleh, & Ahmed Sabeeh Yousif. (2026). E-Healthcare Adoption, User Satisfaction, and Clinical Effectiveness. المجلة الدولية للحاسبات والمعلوماتية, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.59992/IJCI.2026.v5n3p1