A Questionnaire-based Approach on Technology Acceptance Model for Integrated Multiple Ankle Technology Device on Patient Psychology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n3-2.1267Keywords:
Rehabilitation technology device, technology acceptance model, ankle, healthcare industryAbstract
Sports injury is an issue that frequently occurs among athletes. The most common sports injuries are ankle sprains. Hence, to overcome this problem, the National Sports Institute and the Malaysia Sport School has set up special clinics for athletes undergoing rehabilitation treatment. In RMK 10 (2010-2015), the government aims to provide the best medical facilities and producing high value medical device. In spite of the advancement and variety of available ankle rehabilitation technology device, there is an eminent need to investigate the current position on the acceptance of these rehabilitation devices to assist patient recovery. Therefore, in this study technology acceptance model is designed to investigate the user acceptance on ankle rehabilitation technology device application in healthcare industry. The purpose of this study is to design a quantitative approach based on the technology acceptance model questionnaire as its primary research methodology. It utilized quantitative approach based on Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to evaluate the system of ankle rehabilitation technology device. The related constructs for evaluation are: Perceived of Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, User Satisfaction and Attribute of Usability. All these constructs are modified to suit the context of the study. Moreover, this study outlines the details of each construct and its relevance toward the research issue. The outcome of the study represents series of approaches that will  be apply to check the suitability of an ankle rehabilitation technology device on patient in healthcare industry and how well it achieve the aims and objectives of the design.
References
Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein, (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. 1st Edn., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, ISBN-10:0139364439, 278.
Abu-Dalbouh, H. M. (2013). A Questionnaire Approach Based On The Technology Acceptance Model For Mobile Tracking On Patient Progress Applications. Journal of Computer Science, 9(6), 763-770.
Al-Omari, A.I., K. Jaber and A. Al-Omari, (2008). Modified Ratio-Type Estimators Of The Mean Usingextreme Ranked Set Sampling. J. Math. Stat., 4: 150-155. DOI: 10.3844/jmssp.2008.150.155
Ammenwerth, E., F. Ehlers, U. Kutscha, A. Kutscha And R. Eichstadter et al., (2002). Supporting Patient Careby Using Innovative Information Technology. Disease Manage. Health Outcomes, 10: 479-487. DOI:10.2165/00115677-200210080-00004
Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory Of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Burton-Jones, A. and G.S. Hubona, (2005). Individual Differences And Usage Behavior: Revisiting Atechnology Acceptance Model Assumption. DatabaseAdv. Inform., 36: 58-77. DOI:10.1145/1066149.1066155
Rubin, A. Babbie. (2001). Research Methods for Social Workers (4th ed.). Belmont.Blaikie, N. (2007). Approaches To Social Enquiry: Advancing Knowledge. Polity.
Chau, P.Y.K. And P.J.H. Hu, (2001). Information Technology Acceptance By Individual Professionals: A Model Comparison Approach. Decision Sci., 32:699-719. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2001.tb00978.x
Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, (2002a). Investigating Healthcare Professionals’ Decisions To Accept Telemedicine Technology: An Empirical Test Of Competing Theories. Inform. Manage., 39: 297-311. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00098-2
Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, (2002b). Examining a Model Of Information Technology Acceptance By Individual Professionals: An Exploratory Study. J. Manage.Inform. Syst., 18: 297-311.
Chismar, W.G. and S. Wiley-Patton, (2003). Does The Extended Technology Acceptance Model Apply To Physicians. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan. 6-9, IEEE Xplore Press, 160-167. DOI:10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174354
Chomeya, R., (2010). Quality of Psychology Test Between Likert Scale 5 And 6 Points. J. Soc. Sci., 6: 399-403.DOI: 10.3844/jssp.2010.399.403
Creswell, J.W., (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. 4th Edn., Pearson Education, Boston, ISBN-10: 0132613948, 650.
Davis, F.D. and V. Venkatesh, (2004). Toward Preprototype User Acceptance Testing Of New Information Systems: Implications For Software Project Management. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 51:31-46.
Davis, F.D., (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Easeof Use And User Acceptance Of Information Technology. MIS Q., 13: 319-340. DOI: 10.2307/249008
Davis, F.D., (1993). User Acceptance Of Information Technology: System Characteristics, User Perceptions And Behavioral Impacts. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud., 38: 475-487. DOI: 10.1006/imms.1993.1022
Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi and P.R. Warshaw, (1989). User Acceptance Of Computer Technology: A Comparisonof Two Theoretical Models. Manage. Sci., 35: 982-1003. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage publications, inc.
Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen, (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. 1st Edn., Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., ISBN-10: 0201020890, 578.
Grimshaw, JM., R.E. Thomas, G. MacLennan, C. Fraserand C.R. Ramsay et al., (2004). Effectiveness And Efficiency Of Guideline Dissemination And Implementation Strategies. Health Technol. Assess, 8, 1-73. PMID: 14960256
Greene, J. C., &Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Advances In Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges And Benefits Of Integrating Diverse Paradigms (No. 74).
Jossey-Bass., Jemain, A.A., A. Al-Omari and K. Ibrahim, (2007). Multistage Median Ranked Set Sampling For Estimating The Population Median. J. Math. Stat., 3:58-64.
Kanaan, R.K., (2009). Making Sense Of E-Government Implementation In Jordan: A Qualitative Investigation. PhD Thesis, Center of Computing and Social Responsibility. De Montfort University, Leicester.
King, G., Keohane, R. O., &Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference In Qualitative Research. Princeton University Press.
Neuman, S. B., Copple, C., &Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to Read And Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices For Young Children. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1509 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC (Stock no. 161, $12).
Sundaravej, T. (2010). Empirical Validation Of Unified Theory Of Acceptance And Use Of Technology Model. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 13(1), 5-27.
Maciejasz, P., Eschweiler, J., Gerlach-Hahn, K., Jansen-Troy, A., &Leonhardt, S. (2014). A Survey On Robotic Devices For Upper Limb Rehabilitation. Journal Ofneuroengineering And Rehabilitation, 11(1), 3.
Tasir, Z., Abour, K. M. E. A., Halim, N. D. A., & Harun, J. (2012). Relationship Between Teachers' ICT Competency, Confidence Level, And Satisfaction Toward ICT Training Programmes: A Case Study Among Postgraduate Students. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1).
