Factors influencing behavioural intention to use a smart shoe insole in regionally based adults with diabetes: a mixed methods study

BackgroundSmart insole technologies that provide biofeedback on foot health can support foot-care in adults with diabetes. However, the factors that influence patient uptake and acceptance of this technology are unclear. Therefore, the aim of this mixed-methods study was to use an established theoretical framework to determine a model of psychosocial factors that best predicts participant intention to use smart insoles.MethodsFifty-three adults with diabetes from regional Australia completed the validated Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) questionnaire. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the psychosocial factors that best predict behavioural intention to adopt a smart insole. Additionally, a focus group was conducted and thematic analysis was performed to explore barriers and enablers to adopting this technology.ResultsThe multiple regression model that best predicted intention to adopt the smart insole (adjusted R2 = 0.51, p < 0.001) identified that self-efficacy (β = 0.67, p = 0.001) and attitude (β = 0.72, p < 0.001) were significant predictors of behavioural intention, while effort expectancy (β = − 0.52, p = 0.003) and performance expectancy (β = − 0.40, p = 0.040) were moderating factors. Thematic analysis illustrates the importance of attitude and self-efficacy on participants’ behavioural intentions, influenced by participant’s belief in the device’s clinical efficacy and anticipated effort expectancy.ConclusionsThis mixed-methods study demonstrates that attitude, self-efficacy, performance expectancy and effort expectancy combine to predict intention to adopt smart insole technology. Clinicians should consider these psychosocial factors when they prescribe and implement smart soles with patients at high risk of foot ulceration.

[1]  D. Armstrong,et al.  A Supplement to : Foot & Ankle Surgery , 2006 .

[2]  J. Morse.  Mixing Qualitative Methods , 2009, Qualitative health research.

[3]  Terry K Koo,et al.  A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. , 2016, Journal Chiropractic Medicine.

[4]  W. Assendelft,et al.  Patient education for preventing diabetic foot ulceration (Review) , 2012 .

[5]  Samantha Scallan,et al.  Research methods in health: foundations for evidence-based practice , 2017, Education for primary care : an official publication of the Association of Course Organisers, National Association of GP Tutors, World Organisation of Family Doctors.

[6]  J. Sim,et al.  Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization , 2017, Quality & Quantity.

[7]  E. Erdfelder,et al.  Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[8]  M. Ishtiaq.  Book Review Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage , 2019, English Language Teaching.

[9]  Hooman Mohseni,et al.  An Optical-Fiber-Based Smart Textile (Smart Socks) to Manage Biomechanical Risk Factors Associated With Diabetic Foot Amputation , 2017, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[10]  Prem Timsina,et al.  A systematic review of IT for diabetes self-management: Are we there yet? , 2013, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[11]  Mi Jung Rho,et al.  Perception of Influencing Factors on Acceptance of Mobile Health Monitoring Service: A Comparison between Users and Non-users , 2013, Healthcare informatics research.

[12]  W. Assendelft,et al.  Patient education for preventing diabetic foot ulceration. , 2014, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[13]  M. Langarizadeh,et al.  Managing diabetes mellitus using information technology: a systematic review , 2015, Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders.

[14]  Benjamin A Lipsky,et al.  Prevention and management of foot problems in diabetes: a Summary Guidance for Daily Practice 2015, based on the IWGDF Guidance Documents , 2016, Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews.

[15]  P. Lazzarini,et al.  Pathway to ending avoidable diabetes‐related amputations in Australia , 2018, The Medical journal of Australia.

[16]  H. Menz,et al.  Diabetic Foot Australia guideline on footwear for people with diabetes , 2018, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[17]  B. Najafi,et al.  Feasibility and Efficacy of a Smart Mat Technology to Predict Development of Diabetic Plantar Ulcers , 2017, Diabetes Care.

[18]  Anahita Mansoori,et al.  Vinegar consumption can attenuate postprandial glucose and insulin responses; a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. , 2017, Diabetes research and clinical practice.

[19]  Aaron S Kesselheim,et al.  FDA regulation of mobile health technologies. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  In Young Choi,et al.  Factors influencing the acceptance of telemedicine for diabetes management , 2014, Cluster Computing.

[21]  Johnny Saldaña,et al.  The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers , 2009 .

[22]  D G Smith,et al.  Causal pathways for incident lower-extremity ulcers in patients with diabetes from two settings. , 1999, Diabetes care.

[23]  Javad Razjouyan,et al.  Smarter Sole Survival: Will Neuropathic Patients at High Risk for Ulceration Use a Smart Insole-Based Foot Protection System? , 2017, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[24]  M. Cole,et al.  Incorporating UTAUT Predictors for Understanding Home Care Patients' and Clinician's Acceptance of Healthcare Telemedicine Equipment , 2014 .

[25]  R. Rubin,et al.  Patient Interpretation of Neuropathy (PIN) Questionnaire , 2006, Diabetes Care.

[26]  Tanya Serry,et al.  Making sense of qualitative data , 2013 .

[27]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[28]  P. Lazzarini,et al.  Australian diabetes-related foot disease strategy 2018-2022: The first step towards ending avoidable amputations within a generation , 2017 .

[29]  S. de Lusignan,et al.  Impact of Information Technology–Based Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on Glycemic Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[30]  Emma M. Macdonald,et al.  Enablers and barriers to using two-way information technology in the management of adults with diabetes: A descriptive systematic review , 2017, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[31]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2010 .

[32]  H. Swerissen,et al.  The association between foot-care self efficacy beliefs and actual foot-care behaviour in people with peripheral neuropathy: a cross-sectional study , 2009, Journal of foot and ankle research.

[33]  A. Ibrahim.  IDF Clinical Practice Recommendation on the Diabetic Foot: A guide for healthcare professionals. , 2017, Diabetes research and clinical practice.