Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38736709›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2024

Beyond technology acceptance-a focused ethnography on the implementation, acceptance and use of new nursing technology in a German hospital.

Ronny Klawunn, Urs-Vito Albrecht, Deliah Katzmarzyk, Marie-Luise Dierks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Ronny KlawunnDepartment for Patient Orientation and Health Education, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health System Research, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Hanover, Germany.
Urs-Vito AlbrechtDepartment of Digital Medicine, Medical Faculty OWL, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Deliah KatzmarzykDepartment for Patient Orientation and Health Education, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health System Research, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Hanover, Germany.
Marie-Luise DierksDepartment for Patient Orientation and Health Education, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health System Research, Hannover Medical School (MHH), Hanover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Hospitalised patients could benefit from the emergence of novel technologies for nursing care. There are numerous technical products available, but these rarely find their way into practice. Further knowledge is required about the circumstances under which technology in nursing is accepted and used. In the research project "Centre for Implementing Nursing Care Innovations", technical innovations are implemented on a trauma surgery inpatient ward in Germany. After implementation, it was investigated: Which implemented technologies are accepted/rejected, and which factors influence the acceptance/rejection of technology for nurses? Material and methods: A focused ethnography was used, containing two approaches: Results: Discussion: Acceptance or rejection of a product does not necessarily equate to use or non-use of the technology. Before implementation, technology acceptance among users occurs as prejudice-when users are given time to experiment with technology, intention-to-use can stabilize into sustained use. Accepted and used technologies can serve to mask problems (such as staff shortages) and encourage problematic developments, such as the reduction of contact time at the bedside. Therefore, technology acceptance should be qualified in asking

Indexed as

ethnographyGermanyimplementationnursing careparticipant observationtechnical innovationstechnology acceptanceUTAUT

Identifiers

PMID38736709
PMCPMC11085260

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.