Introduction: Mobile Health (mHealth) applications allow for new possibilities and opportunities in patient care. Their potential throughout the whole patient journey is undisputed. However, the eventual adoption by patients depends on their acceptance of and motivation to use mHealth applications as well as their adherence. Therefore, we investigated the motivation and drivers of acceptance for mHealth and developed an adapted model of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2). Methods: We evaluated 215 patients with chronic gastroenterological diseases who answered a questionnaire including all model constructs with 7-point Likert scale items. Our model was adapted from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use in Technology 2 and includes influencing factors such as facilitating conditions, performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, social influence factors, effort expectancy, as well as personal empowerment and data protection concerns. Model evaluation was performed with structural equation modelling with PLS-SEM. Bootstrapping was performed for hypothesis testing. Results and Conclusion: Patients had a median age of 55.5 years, and the gender ratio was equally distributed. Forty percent received a degree from a university, college, technical academy, or engineering school. The majority of patients suffered from chronic liver disease, but patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, GI cancers, and pancreatic diseases were also included. Patients considered their general technology knowledge as medium to good or very good (78%). Actual usage of mHealth applications in general was rare, while the intention to use them was high. The leading acceptance factor for mHealth applications in our patient group was feasibility, both in terms of technical requirements and the intuitiveness and manageability of the application. Concerns about data privacy did not significantly impact the intention to use mobile devices. Neither the gamification aspect nor social influence factors played a significant role in the intention to use mHealth applications. Interpretation: Most of our patients were willing to spend time on a mHealth application specific to their disease on a regular basis. Acceptance and adherence are ensured by efficient utilization that requires minimum effort and compatible technologies as well as support in case of difficulties. Social influence and hedonic motivation, which were part of UTAUT2, as well as data security concerns, were not significantly influencing our patients’ intention to use mHealth applications. A literature review revealed that drivers of acceptance vary considerably among different population and patient groups. Therefore, healthcare and mHealth providers should put effort into understanding their specific target groups’ drivers of acceptance. We provided those for a cohort of patients from gastroenterology in this project.

1.
World Health Organization
.
Governing body matters: key issues arising out of the seventy-first world health assembly and the 142nd and 143rd sessions of the WHO executive board
:
World Health Organization. Regional Office for South-East Asia
;
2018
.
2.
Burke
LE
,
Ma
J
,
Azar
KM
,
Bennett
GG
,
Peterson
ED
,
Zheng
Y
, et al
.
Current science on consumer use of mobile health for cardiovascular disease prevention: a scientific statement from the American heart association
.
Circulation
.
2015
;
132
(
12
):
1157
213
. .
3.
Peiris
D
,
Praveen
D
,
Johnson
C
,
Mogulluru
K
.
Use of mHealth systems and tools for non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review
.
J Cardiovasc Transl Res
.
2014
;
7
(
8
):
677
91
. .
4.
Tomlinson
M
,
Rotheram-Borus
MJ
,
Swartz
L
,
Tsai
AC
.
Scaling up mHealth: where is the evidence
.
PLoS Med
.
2013
;
10
(
2
):
e1001382
. .
5.
Hull
TD
,
Mahan
K
.
A study of asynchronous mobile-enabled SMS text psychotherapy
.
Telemed J E Health
.
2017
;
23
(
3
):
240
7
. .
6.
Materia
FT
,
Faasse
K
,
Smyth
JM
.
Understanding and preventing health concerns about emerging mobile health technologies
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2020
;
8
(
5
):
e14375
. .
7.
Becker
S
,
Mitchell
A
,
Königsmann
T
,
Kribben
A
,
Erbel
R
.
[Mobile applications and management of hypertension: possibilities, problems and perspectives]
.
Herz
.
2012
;
37
(
7
):
742
5
. .
8.
Becker
S
,
Miron-Shatz
T
,
Schumacher
N
,
Krocza
J
,
Diamantidis
C
,
Albrecht
UV
.
mHealth 2.0: experiences, possibilities, and perspectives
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2014
;
2
(
2
):
e24
. .
9.
Bajaj
JS
,
Thacker
LR
,
Heuman
DM
,
Fuchs
M
,
Sterling
RK
,
Sanyal
AJ
, et al
.
The Stroop smartphone application is a short and valid method to screen for minimal hepatic encephalopathy
.
Hepatology
.
2013
;
58
(
3
):
1122
32
. .
10.
Con
D
,
Jackson
B
,
Gray
K
,
De Cruz
P
.
eHealth for inflammatory bowel disease self-management: the patient perspective
.
Scand J Gastroenterol
.
2017
;
52
(
9
):
973
80
. .
11.
Messa
H
,
Müller
T
,
Richter
L
,
Silberzahn
T
.
Germany’s e-health transformation makes uneven progress
.
Life Sciences Practice, McKinsey and Company
.
2022
.
12.
Brown
LJ
,
Jones
GM
,
Bond
MJ
.
E-health: psychosocial challenges for South Australian rural mental health consumers
.
Rural Remote Health
.
2019
;
19
(
3
):
5103
. .
13.
Nabutovsky
I
,
Nachshon
A
,
Klempfner
R
,
Shapiro
Y
,
Tesler
R
.
Digital cardiac rehabilitation programs: the future of patient-centered medicine
.
Telemed J E Health
.
2020
;
26
(
1
):
34
41
. .
14.
Brusniak
K
,
Arndt
HM
,
Feisst
M
,
Haßdenteufel
K
,
Matthies
LM
,
Deutsch
TM
, et al
.
Challenges in acceptance and compliance in digital health assessments during pregnancy: prospective cohort study
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2020
;
8
(
10
):
e17377
. .
15.
Rabinovich
L
,
Molton
JS
,
Ooi
WT
,
Paton
NI
,
Batra
S
,
Yoong
J
.
Perceptions and acceptability of digital interventions among tuberculosis patients in Cambodia: qualitative study of video-based directly observed therapy
.
J Med Internet Res
.
2020
;
22
(
7
):
e16856
. .
16.
Krebs
P
,
Duncan
DT
.
Health app use among US mobile phone owners: a national survey
.
JMIR mHealth uHealth
.
2015
;
3
(
4
):
e101
. .
17.
Bresnick
J
.
mHealth apps are common, but patient engagement isn’t sustained
:
Health IT Analytics
;
2015
.
18.
Zhou
L
,
Bao
J
,
Watzlaf
V
,
Parmanto
B
.
Barriers to and facilitators of the use of mobile health apps from a security perspective: mixed-methods study
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2019
;
7
(
4
):
e11223
. .
19.
Vaghefi
I
,
Tulu
B
.
The continued use of mobile health apps: insights from a longitudinal study
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2019
;
7
(
8
):
e12983
. .
20.
Dahlhausen
F
,
Zinner
M
,
Bieske
L
,
Ehlers
JP
,
Boehme
P
,
Fehring
L
.
There’s an app for that, but nobody’s using it: insights on improving patient access and adherence to digital therapeutics in Germany
.
Digit Health
.
2022
;
8
:
20552076221104672
. .
21.
Lauer
W
,
Löbker
W
,
Sudhop
T
,
Broich
K
.
[Digital health applications (DiGA) as an innovative component in digital healthcare in Germany-information, experiences, and perspectives]
.
Bundesgesundheitsbl
.
2021
;
64
(
10
):
1195
7
. .
22.
DiGA-report 2022
:
Techniker Krankenkasse
.
2022
.
23.
Sorge um Privatsphäre als “mHealth-Einstiegsbarriere?” Theoretische Fundierung und empirische Analyse der Technologieakzeptanz bei Nutzer* innen und Nicht-Nutzer* innen von Fitness-Apps.
In:
Rosset
M
,
Schwepe
M
,
Emde-Lachmund
K
,
Baumann
E
, editors.
Gesundheitskommunikation und Digitalisierung
:
Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG
;
2020
.
24.
Schwepe
MC
.
Fluch für die Privatsphäre oder Segen für die Gesundheit?: die Rolle der Sorge um die Privatsphäre von Gesundheitsdaten im Kontext der Nutzungsdeterminanten von Fitness-Apps: hochschule für Musik, Theater und Medien Hannover
.
Inst für Journalistik
.
2016
.
25.
Salgado
T
,
Tavares
J
,
Oliveira
T
.
Drivers of mobile health acceptance and use from the patient perspective: survey study and quantitative model development
.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
.
2020
;
8
(
7
):
e17588
. .
26.
Lemire
M
,
Sicotte
C
,
Paré
G
.
Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health
.
Health Policy
.
2008
;
88
(
1
):
130
40
. .
27.
Tavares
J
,
Oliveira
T
.
Electronic health record portal adoption: a cross country analysis
.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
.
2017
;
17
(
1
):
97
. .
28.
Davis
FD
.
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
.
MIS quarterly
.
1989
;
13
(
3
):
319
40
. .
29.
Venkatesh
V
,
Morris
MG
,
Davis
GB
,
Davis
FD
.
User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view
.
MIS quarterly
.
2003
;
27
(
3
):
425
78
. .
30.
Yuan
S
,
Ma
W
,
Kanthawala
S
,
Peng
W
.
Keep using my health apps: discover users’ perception of health and fitness apps with the UTAUT2 model
.
Telemed J E Health
.
2015
;
21
(
9
):
735
41
. .
31.
Ringle
CM
,
Wende
S
,
Becker
J-M
.
SmartPLS 3
.
Boenningstedt
:
SmartPLS GmbH
;
2015
; p.
584
.
32.
Hair
JF
Jr
,
Hult
GTM
,
Ringle
CM
,
Sarstedt
M
.
A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)
:
Sage publications
;
2021
.
33.
Hulland
J
.
Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies
.
Strateg Manag J
.
1999
;
20
(
2
):
195
204
. .
34.
Bagozzi
RP
,
Yi
Y
.
On the evaluation of structural equation models
.
J Acad Market Sci
.
1988
;
16
(
1
):
74
94
. .
35.
Louissaint
J
,
Lok
AS
,
Fortune
BE
,
Tapper
EB
.
Acceptance and use of a smartphone application in cirrhosis
.
Liver Int
.
2020
;
40
(
7
):
1556
63
. .
You do not currently have access to this content.