@文章{信息:doi/10.2196/26881，作者=“AshaRani, PV和Jue Hua, Lau和Roystonn, Kumarasan和Siva Kumar, Fiona Devi和Peizhi, Wang和Ying Jie, Soo和Shafie, Saleha和Chang, Sherilyn和Jeyagurunathan, Anitha和Boon Yiang, Chua和Abdin, Edimansyah和Ajit Vaingankar, Janhavi和Sum, Chee Fang和Lee, Eng Sing和Chong, Siow Ann和Subramaniam, Mythily”，标题=“普通人群对糖尿病护理电子健康服务的准备和接受程度:横断面研究”，期刊="J Med Internet Res"，年="2021"，月="Sep"，日="2"，卷="23"，数="9"，页数="e26881"，关键词="eHealth;糖尿病;一般人群;验收;背景:糖尿病管理在全球范围内是一个日益严峻的卫生保健挑战。电子健康可以彻底改变糖尿病护理，其成功与否取决于最终用户的接受程度。目的:本研究旨在了解在一个多民族的亚洲国家，普通人群对糖尿病电子医疗服务的准备和接受程度，电子医疗的感知优势和劣势，以及与电子医疗准备和接受程度相关的因素。方法:在这项横断面流行病学研究中，参与者(N=2895)是从人口登记处通过不成比例分层随机抽样选择的。招募年龄为>岁的新加坡公民或永久居民。 The data were captured through computer-assisted personal interviews. An eHealth questionnaire was administered in one of four local languages (English, Chinese, Malay, or Tamil), as preferred by the participant. Bivariate chi-square analyses were performed to compare the sociodemographic characteristics and perception of advantages and disadvantages of eHealth services between the diabetes and nondiabetes groups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine factors associated with eHealth readiness and acceptance. All analyses were weighted using survey weights to account for the complex survey design. Results: The sample comprised participants with (n=436) and without (n=2459) diabetes. eHealth readiness was low, with 47.3{\%} of the overall sample and 75.7{\%} of the diabetes group endorsing that they were not ready for eHealth (P<.001). The most acceptable eHealth service overall was booking appointments (67.4{\%}). There was a significantly higher preference in the diabetes group for face-to-face sessions for consultation with the clinician (nondiabetes: 83.5{\%} vs diabetes: 92.6{\%}; P<.001), receiving prescriptions (61.9{\%} vs 79.3{\%}; P<.001), referrals to other doctors (51.4{\%} vs 72.2{\%}; P<.001), and receiving health information (34{\%} vs 63.4{\%}; P<.001). The majority of both groups felt that eHealth requires users to be computer literate (90.5{\%} vs 94.3{\%}), does not build clinician-patient rapport compared with face-to-face sessions (77.5{\%} vs 81{\%}), and might not be credible (56.8{\%} vs 64.2{\%}; P=.03). Age (≥35 years), ethnicity (Indian), and lower education status had lower odds of eHealth readiness. Age (≥35 years), ethnicity (Indian), lower education status (primary school), BMI (being underweight), and marital status (being single) were associated with a lower likelihood of eHealth acceptance. Among only those with diabetes, a longer duration of diabetes (4-18 years), higher education (degree or above), and younger age (23-49 years) were associated with eHealth readiness, whereas younger age and income (SGD 2000-3999 [US {\$}1481-{\$}2961]) were associated with acceptance. Conclusions: Overall, an unfavorable attitude toward eHealth was observed, with a significantly higher number of participants with diabetes reporting their unwillingness to use these services for their diabetes care. Sociodemographic factors associated with acceptance and readiness identified a group of people who were unlikely to accept the technology and thus need to be targeted for eHealth literacy programs to avoid health care disparity. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037125 ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/26881", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2021/9/e26881", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/26881", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34473062" }