01 2 3 1393 #76-82' .% " ! $ #
#
! "
$ "$# % & '
!" & %()
2
$!
#
! "
1
* + 1
93/12/3 :&' ( - *./
*1
1 93/10/28 :&' ( )" *+$
,! (PACS) ! "# $ % & '() * +' . . 6* *0' !/"# . 1! 2 3 4! BA @ / >'';# -;< = >! ? -1' & . * +' ,! : / ' .C / ' /6 9I . . @ 9 E -; J .C 2 1& ;=% / - -. 6 L .& . ! "# $ % & '() * +' P +Q5 6 / 6 'F/# 6 17 -I+& SPSS 2&
: 0 ! 5 & /# -. / -& ! ! ,5. 7 !8 ' 91 5' ! "# $ % & '() * +' 7 !8 0'0H# - 'F/# -;< = D9 E : -. / ' /6 5' K/' Y5 .(r=0/1) M 5'% + CQR -= '& & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& >' (r=0/2) 7 P& >' (r=0/5) /J 5'% + CQR -= - CQ+& 7 P& / - CQ+& 7 P& >' M& .(r=0/1) /J 5'% + CQR -= '& * +' ;[ / - CQ+& '() * +' & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& / - CQ+& 7 P& '\ M& D -;< = X! & : . & 'L [ -J/# / ! !- & ! + * +' >! 7 !8 8L 'B]# @ / -. ! "# $ % & '
)
2/0
)="> # ,# -# -( . #/0 1#2
PM&
K/_! .C /[ _ _ 0 ! >' Y5 C K/ @% _+ /_ -_ _! l . _M -_. . *' _# 5 _+' s_'# # >! .[10] ! 5& ' 9' ' C'% / ,_! : / ' ! ,5. 7 !8 ' 91 6> 7 !8 /v# . * +' _ 6>_ ! _d& _. 9 . ' 9' _ $ _ _'( $ .[11] + *d '+ C C -h 6> 7 !8 ' CdJ 0I Technology Acceptance 6>_ 7 !8_ $ _ -_. 7 !8_ ' . >! M' Model(TAM) $ _ >_! .[12-13] C_ - _ _ ' 6> C_ _ 7 !8_ BA @ / /P< >! #X! -;< = >! -0v+ >! ` C'5 - -J/# 8< .[14] ! _"# $ % & '() * +' 7 !8 BA @ / >'';# _ / 6 _ _ 5' K/__! -_ -_J/# _ .[1] _ ' "[ 5J _ -_ -_ 2 5# 3/H# $ _R /_ -_ . _& _ 2 0 /( / -_05J ) D /M. ! /&K c J _ _ 5' _5# 2005 $ _ _! # & d; ( ! _ . @_" C_& ! -_ . C< PM& .C_ _& 5& _d _ 3/_H# >_! '& C 2 e& .[2] _ C_Q[ f0 I 9I _ _! @'_+& _ 5' g/"( - C . . MI B d -h ( C' '. /Qd _ -_ _ ! _( 9__ . i_ >' Y5 -h ! _ * _+' _! >_! .[1] L '& & _ / 7 L 5 M -. /5& _ _ * # + K/! _ ( _ . _''\# ! "# m# c '% ! &/ ! # ! j__"I /__ _ 7 _L _ 5 _M _ C' C< D >! . * + K/_! >'_ Y5 .[4] _& L ! . /(
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82
;:
,/ 9!
: 91393 * % 2
17 -I+& SPSS 2& @'0H# -! 1# / 6 ,' L/ @'0H# CdJ 'F/# 6 >' -= w/& >'';# CdJ /' L P +Q5 6 -= >'';# CdJ @% + t / 6 - + @% + '\ >'';# CdJ ANOVA / 6 - + '\ C'+ J ~= . -% > ) ,' L/ >' -= . ! L 2 1& ( 0'"H# '"H#
-'%
L
•
F 58 -. M& - ! / $ 34 L • >'P& ' & / 89 . $ 12 L • >' . -% >'P& ' 3/1 K/' Y5 PACS * +' & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& K/' -= 1 $ J C'';# R P +Q5 ' r $ J >! . M& 7 P& - CQ+& PACS / - CQ+& 7 P& - 7 P& M' 'B]# PACS & 6 - CQ+& (r=0/5) * +' >! 1 5 /5& /# 1 5 $ J - ! :Q ' s+D -;< = /J/ 4 2 5# -. . * .C M& P +Q5 s! >'';# P +Q5
.+/0( 1% 2 1 3& 4
5
;=% w/& 0'0H# - 'F/# -;< = ,! D -;< = . . L ! PACS 7 !8 BA @ / >'';# ? 2/0 PM& sI 5' K/ . C -&/5& y ( & 20 -&/5& ,! - M ! ! >'';# CdJ ,! z ! L t! /# &6 >' - M xI& z ! L @'5 # L 5 4 /# - M l 1 -. '1 6 ! ! { Q& . ' - M 90 ;# . & 8L 5& 'd ! J 'd d'% 'd 5' - K/' . & /( & L - M CQ+& -. 6t5J - M .C / F 72 - M • s!
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82
78
* +,
! CD PACS 2 .EF
'( !
%)
%
B A ) .? %@, >
PACS 2 : 5 & )
:5&
"# $ % &
r=0/1
:1 ! =
?
r=0/2
2
& 6 - CQ+& 7 P& PACS
2
R =0/016
R =0/059
r=0/1
r=0/5
2
/ - CQ+& 7 P& PACS
2
R =0/024
'( )
R =0/027
r=0.1
0.024
0.27 r=0.5
r=0.1
r=0.1
r=0.12 0059 r=0.1
PACS
_;[
CD
0.016
'( %)
%
J * 2J ANOVA In dependent sample t-test ANOVA ANOVA ANOVA
B
)4D
:
$ % & 2 .EF : 5 & PACS (P-value) 0/2 0/3 0/5 0/8 0/7
_ - 7 _P& _ / - CQ+& .(r=0/5, R2=0/27) /_J PACS -. ! /( -;< = (2013) 9& 5 1& 0 / - CQ+& 7 P& >' QR *'% + -= /J # '< ! A @! 5# - + '\ -& ! * +' M& Huang Pai -1' & >' Y5 .[16] / - CQ+& 7 P& '\ >' QR *'% + -= .[17] /J 6 - CQ+& 7 P&
:1 : ,
- _+ _ '\ ,' L/ c_ PACS * +' ;[ -= ‚' 6 c -.
- 7 P& ,' L/ '\ >' .(P>0/05) C & /J PACS * +'
%)
B A ) G)
B A ) I) :2 ! = $%&2 :5& ) PACS (P-value)
?
0/3 0/4 0/6 0/9 0/9
* +_'
79
'\ >' -= 2 $ J - 7 P& M& P-value %
%)
B
4D : B > zJ . -% '"H# ~=
KL) - * / - CQ+& 7 P& -. P .C q = - + * @% + '\ ,! / 'L [ & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& '\ 'B]# CH# CQ+& 7 P& '\ -. P - + '\ 9%& 8L 'B]# 6 @F D X! & .[15] C e& @% + '\ / 7 P& >' QR *'% + -= -. M& D -;< =
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82
;:
,/ 9!
: 91393 * % 2
.+/0( 1% 2 1 3& 4
C! 5D 6 '& & ( Huang Pai 9& 5 & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& >' >' Y5 .[17-19] . ;[ / - CQ+& 7 P& '& ;< = X! & -. (r=0/1) M 5'% + -= * +' X! & (2002) Chau Hu (2008) 9& 5 Zhang @F D X! & .[21-22] . C! 5D -;< = - CQ+& 7 P& -. C L -1' & /# D -;< = * +' & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& / .& 6 7 !8 5d '+ 9%& PACS ' >' Y5 CQ+& 7 P& - ! PACS * +' M' 'B]# -. ` /5& M' -J/# / . PACS * +' ;[ - 7 P& '+ 9%& 7 !8 /v# >' . . ! * +_' >! _J ' 5d -h '( ` -. 7 !8 /v# - /v# >! # /[ ! / 7 !8 $ & - * +' ' 5d 9%& 7 !8 / d M' - .C . ' C /D E! ' CdJ >'! & w C! ! M& € - /' & >'%%H >' Y5 . ' 2/0 PM& K/' QR *'% + -= -. & ' -1' & >! - /( -;< = - + '\ -& ! * +' & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& .[16] /J # '< ! A @! 5# 7 P& >' -. ! (2011) 5 0' 5 QR *'% + -= & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& .[1] /J 9& 5 wu (2010) 9& 5 & ( >' Y5 .[18 19] !C d M X! & - (2008) / - CQ+& 7 P& >' P +Q5 ' -+! % & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& PACS * +' CQ+& 7 P& -. !6 PACS * +' - 7 P& 6 - 7 P& M' 'B]# / D -;< = -1' & (2008) 5 - Wu -;< = . '& (2012) 9& 5 ( Q >' Y5 .[19] . C! 5D .[20] & ' d M X! & PACS / - CQ+& 7 P& -1' & & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& - CQ+& 6 - 7 P& - 7 P& & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& >' .C # BA 6 -) /_J _QR *'% + -=_ PACS _ 2 .(r=0/1, R =0/016 -1' & - (2002) Hu Chau 4 /# 2 1& -;< = 9& 5 ( Q .[21] X D -;< = - M & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& -. & ' -1' & >! - '& (2012) 7 !8 BA @ / >! 5d ! .[20] / - CQ+& 7 P& 9%& D -;< = -. ` M& & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& #*d PACS & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& 9%& /# 5& .C L e& ƒ& *. 6 J ' & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& >' QR *'% + -= /J PACS / - CQ+& 7 P& & 6 - CQ+& 7 P& 9%& M& /( -. (r=0/1) Wu ;< = X! & C 6 /
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82
80
* +,
!
1. Esmaeili M, Toloei Eshlaghi A , PourEbrahimi AR, Esmeili R. Study on feasibility and acceptance of implementation of technology acceptance model of davis in staff of Shahid Behshti University of Medical Sciencess. Pajoohandeh. 2013;18(1):40-5. 2. Modiri N, Ebadi Z. IT Governance Engineering.1th ed. Tehran. Mehregan ghalam; 2013. Persian. 3. Backer A, Mortelé K, Keulenaer B. Picture archiving and communication system – filmless radiology and distance radiology. JBR–BTR. 2004;87:234-41. 4. De Backer AI, Mortele KJ, De Keulenaer BL. Picture archiving and communication system--Part one: filmless radiology and distance radiology. JBR-BTR. 2004; 87(5):234-41. 5. Strickland N. PACS (Picture archiving and communication systems): filmless radiology. Arch Dis Child. 2000;83(1):82–86. 6. Amini M, Rabiee R, Azarmehr M, Khorami F. Evaluation of success rate hospital information system project, using gap analysis model in Shahid Mohammadi hospital, Bandar Abbas, Iran. Hormozgan Med J. 2013-2014; 17(5):430-40. 7. Pilling JR. Picture archiving and communication systems: the users' view. Br J Radiol. 2003; 76(908):519-24. 8. Mansoori B, Erhard KK, Sunshine JL. Picture archiving and communication system (PACS) implementation, integration & benefits in an integrated health system. Acad Radiol. 2012; 19(2):229-35. 9. Kijsanayotin B, Pannarunothai S, Speedie SM. Factors influencing health information technology adoption in Thailand's community health centers: applying the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform. 2009; 78(6):404-16. 10. Tsiknakis M, Kouroubali A. Organizational factors affecting successful adoption of innovative eHealth services: a case study employing the FITT framework. Int J Med Inform. 2009; 78(1):39-52. 11. Holden RJ, Karsh BT. The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform. 2010; 43(1):159-72. 12. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. New York: The Free Press; 1995. 13. Kahouei M, Babamohamadi H. Factors affecting
81
"# $ % &
'( )
information technology acceptance in clinical settings from nurses' perspective. Pyavrd Salamat. 2013; 7(4):262-77. 14. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989; 13(3):319-40. 15. Lee Y, Kozar KA, Larsen KR. The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2003; 12(50):752-80. 16. Maleki najafdar AR, Rasouli shemirani M, Rousta M. The impacts of factors involved in the taxpayers acceptance and application of IT on the provision of etax services based upon davis model (case study of taxpayers at South of Tehran Province tax. Journal of Tax Research. 2012;20(14):135-68. Persian. 17. Pai FY, Huang KI. Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of healthcare information systems. Technol Forecast Soc. 2011; 78(4):650-60. 18. Khorasani A, Abdolmaleki J, Zahedi H. Factors affecting e-learning acceptance among students of Tehran university of medical sciences based on technology acceptance model (TAM). Iran J Med Educ. 2012;11(6):644-73. 19. Wu JH, Shen WS, Lin LM, Greenes RA, Bates DW. Testing the technology acceptance model for evaluating healthcare professionals' intention to use an adverse event reporting system. Int J Qual Health Care. 2008;20(2):123-9. 20. Abdekhoda M, Ahmadi M, Hosseini A, Parikhani E, Farhadi A. Factors affecting information technology acceptance by health information management (HIM) staff of Tehran university of medical sciences’ hospitals based on the technology acceptance model (TAM) in 2011. Pyavrd Salamat. 2012; 7(4):287-98. 21. Chau PYK, Hu PJH. Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology: an empirical test of competing theories. Inform Manage. 2002; 39(4):297-311. 22. Zhang N, Guo X, Chen G. IDT-TAM integrated model for IT adoption. Tsinghua Science & Technology 2008; 13(3):306-11.
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82
Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics Medical Informatics Research Center 2015; 1(2): 76-82
Original Article
The Effective Factors in Adopting Picture Archiving and Communication System in Shiraz Educational Hospitals Based on Technology Acceptance Model Ali Garavand1*, Shahram Ghanbari1, Saeed Ebrahimi1, Mojtaba Kafashi1, Frozandeh Ahmadzadeh2 Received: 18 Jan, 2015
Accepted: 22 Feb, 2015
Introduction: Today, using information technology in organizations is necessary. The Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS), as a computer tool, can provide conditions to create no movies medical imaging centers, if companied with other requirements . On the other hand, the evaluation of technology acceptance can be helpful in successful implementation of system. The aim of this study was to determine the effective factors in adopting Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) in Shiraz educational hospitals. Method: The present study is a cross-sectional descriptive analytical survey. The study population consisted of all radiology staff in Shiraz educational hospitals that used picture archiving and communication system .The data gathering tool was TAM questionnaire and data were analyzed using SPSS v.17 software, and descriptive statistical methods and statistical correlation tests such as regression, independent sample t-test and ANOVA. Results: The findings shown that perceived ease of use was significantly correlated with both perceived use and actual use (r=0.2, r=0.1) respectively. Perceived usefulness was also significantly correlated with perceived use and actual use (r=0.5, r=0.1) respectively. Conclusion: The results shown that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are effective factors in adopting PACS that must be considered in evaluation and planning. Key words: Picture archiving and communication system, Technology acceptance model, Radiology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
Citation: Garavand A, Ghanbari S, Ebrahimi S, Kafashi M, Ahmadzadeh F. The Effective Factors in adopting Picture Archiving and Communication System in Shiraz Educational Hospitals Based on Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics 2015; 1(2): 76-82. 1. M.Sc. Student in Health Information Technology, Health Information Management Dept., School of Medical Information Science & Management, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran 2. M.Sc. in Medical Record, Lecturer, Health Information Management Dept., School of Medical Information Science & Management, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran *Correspondence: School of Management and Medical Information, Building Diamond, Alley 29, Street between Palestine and Mulla, Sadra Ghasroldashti Street, Shiraz, Iran Tel: 09382122250 Email: Shiraz
[email protected]
