Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32229474›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Patient Attitudes Toward Mobile Device Use by Health Care Providers in the Emergency Department: Cross-Sectional Survey.

Mohamad Alameddine, Hani Tamim, Dima Hadid, Mohamad-Ali Cheaito, Maha Makki, Hadi Maatouk, Eveline Hitti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mohamad AlameddineDepartment of Health Management and Policy, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0002-2299-1242
Hani TamimDepartment of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0002-2019-4362
Dima HadidDepartment of Emergency Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0001-7610-2984
Mohamad-Ali CheaitoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0001-6653-8848
Maha MakkiDepartment of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0003-4559-0457
Hadi MaatoukDepartment of Emergency Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0002-7846-0926
Eveline HittiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0001-9576-895X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care provider usage of mobile devices is increasing globally; however, there is little understanding of patient perceptions on this behavior in a health care setting.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess patients' attitudes toward mobile device usage by health care providers in the emergency department and to identify predictors of these attitudes.

methodsThe study was carried out at the emergency department of a large academic tertiary care medical center in Lebanon. A cross-sectional survey design was adopted by administering a questionnaire to medically stable adult patients who presented to the emergency department with an emergency severity index of 3, 4, or 5 between January 2017 and March 2018. The questionnaire collected relevant patient demographic information and included questions related to their mobile device usage along with those evaluating attitudes for the use of mobile devices by health care providers with respect to six major domains: role in health care, distraction potential, impact on communication, empathy, privacy, and professionalism. The attitude toward mobile device usage by health care providers in the emergency department was the main outcome variable. A stepwise logistic regression model was used to assess the association between the outcome variable and the demographic and attitude-related independent variables.

resultsAmong the 438 eligible patients, 338 patients responded to the questionnaire for a response rate of 70.0%. Overall, 313/338 (92.6%) respondents agreed that mobile devices improve health care delivery, whereas 132/338 (39.1%) respondents were opposed to their usage by health care providers in the emergency department (95% CI: 34.0-44.4). The majority (240/338, 71.0%) of patients agreed that mobile devices are a source of distraction to health care providers in the workplace. Females (odds ratio [OR]=1.67, 95% CI: 1.00-2.78) as well as all patients (OR=2.54, 95% CI 1.36-4.76) who believed that mobile devices were a source of distraction, reflecting a lack of professionalism (OR=2.77, 95% CI 1.59-4.82) and impacting the provider's ability to relate to the patient (OR=2.93, 95% CI 1.72-4.99), were more likely to agree that mobile devices should not be used in the emergency department.

conclusionsPatients' negative attitude toward mobile device use in the emergency department is largely driven by patient gender (females), patient perception of the distraction potential of the devices, and their negative impact on the health care provider's empathy and professionalism. The findings of this study shed light on the importance of encouraging stakeholders to impose a digital professionalism code of conduct for providers working in acute health care settings.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEmergency Service, HospitalAdultAgedComputers, HandheldCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansLebanonMaleMiddle Agedattentionattitudescode of conductdigital professionalismdistractionemergency departmentempathypatientsprofessionalismsmart devices

Identifiers

PMID32229474
PMCPMC7157496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.