Journal of Medical Systems

, Volume 28, Issue 6, pp 617–632 | Cite as

Factors Affecting the Adoption of Telemedicine—A Multiple Adopter Perspective

  • Nir Menachemi
  • Darrell E. BurkeEmail author
  • Douglas J. Ayers


This paper utilizes the diffusion of innovation framework to discuss factors affecting adoption of telemedicine. Empirical and anecdotal findings are organized across five attributes affecting innovation adoption rates for the following four adopter groups: physicians, patients, hospital administrators, and payers. A discussion of the implications is included.

information technology diffusion of innovation outcomes 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Davis, S., What's holding up the telemedicine explosion?,pp.66–67, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Muirhead, G., An update on telemedicine. Patient Care 34(6):96–109, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marta, M. R., Telemedicine payment: Then and now. Healthc. Financ. Manage. 57(7):50–54, 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burke, D. E., Wang, B. B. L., Wan, T. T. H., and Diana, M. L., Exploring hospitals' adoption of information technology. J. Med. Syst. 26(4):349–355, 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Friedman, L. H., and Goes, J. B., The timing of medical technology acquisition: Strategic decision making in turbulent environments. J. Healthc. Manage. 45(5):317–329, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rogers, E., Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn., The Free Press, New York, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Strode, S. W., Gustke, S., and Allen, A., Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. JAMA 281(12):1066–1068, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Austin, C., and Boxerman, S., Information Systems for Health Services Administration, 5th edn., Health Administration Press, Chicago, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burns, P., Telehealth or telehype? Some observations and thoughts on the current status and future of telehealth. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4, Winter):5–15, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Whitlock, W. L., Buker, K., Kruse, B., Pavliscscak, H., Rasche, J., and Mease, A. D., An enhanced healthcare platform via e-medicine. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4, Winter):111–120, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chepesiuk, R., Making house calls: Using telecommunications to bring health care into the home. Environ. Health Perspect. 107(11):556–560, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferrer-Roca, O., Diaz De Leon, R. D., de Latorre, F. J., Suarez-Delgado, M., Di Persia, L., and Cordo, M., Aviation medicine: Challenges for telemedicine. J. Telemed. Telecare 8(1):1–4, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Essex, D., Hop on the bandwidth wagon. Healthc. Inform. November:44–52, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Papageorges, M., Telemedicine: What's in it for practitioners? DVM 29(9):32–34, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tweed, V., The brave new reality of telemedicine. Bus. Health 16(9):34–39, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gagnon, M. P., Godin, G., Gagne C., Fortin, J. P., Lamothe, L., Reinharz, D., Cloutier, A., An adap-tation of the theory of interpersonal behaviour to the study of telemedicine adoption by physicians. Int. J. Med. Inf. 71(2/3):103–115, 2003.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zollo, S., Kienzle, M., Loeffelholz, P., and Sebille, S., Telemedicine to Iowa's correctional facilities: Initial clinical experience and assessment of program costs. Telemed. J. 5(3):291–301, 1999.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paul, D. L., Pearlson, K. E., and McDaniel, R. R., Assessing technological barriers to telemedicine: Technology-management implications. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 46(3):279–288, 1999.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sandberg, L. A., Telemedicine continues to wrestle wicked problems: Reimbursement, licensure, and bandwidth rules (or is it compliance?). Health Manage. Technol. 20(1):133–134, 1999.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tieman, J., Monitoring a good opportunity. Mod. Healthc. 3(43):75–82, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anonymous. Claims Process Transmittal 1885, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003. Medicare Intermediary Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) Manual Centers for Medi-care & Medicaid Services (CMS), (Date: May 16, 2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Anonymous. Medicaid and Telemedicine, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anonymous. States Where Medicaid Reimbursement of Services Utilizing Telemedicine Is Available, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2003.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Strode, S. W., Gustke, S., and Allen, A., Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. JAMA 281(12):1066–1068, 1999.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anonymous. Advice from the American Hospital Association. Health Manage. Technol. 21(10):12, 2000.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    NTIA. Telemedicine Report to Congress, 1997, National Telecommunications and Information Ad-ministration, Washington, DC, pp. 1–31, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Huston, T. L., and Huston, J. L., Is telemedicine a practical reality? Association for Computing Machinery. Commun. ACM 43(6):91–95, 2000.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mair, F., and Whitten, P., Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. BMJ 320(7248):1517–1520, 2000.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Curtin, L., and Simpson, R., Telemedicine tangles with red tape. Health Manage. Technol. 20(10):46–47, 1999.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Allen, A., and Stein, S., Cost Effectiveness of Telemedicine, 2000, 2000. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pal, B., Following up outpatients by telephone: Pilot study. BMJ 316(7145):1647, 1998.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schooley, A. K., Allowing FDA regulations of communications software used in telemedicine: A potentially fatal diagnosis? Fed. Commun. Law J. 50(3):731–751, 1998.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reich-Hale, D., Experts are divided on telemedicine privacy hazards. Natl. Underwriter 102(45):8, 13, 1998Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stone, T. H., Patient health information confidentiality in telehealth applications. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4):79–88, 1999.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Whitted, G. S., Medical technology diffusion and its effects on the modern hospital. Healthc. Manage. Rev. 6(2):45–54, 1981.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brown, C. V., and Bostrom, R. P., Organizational designs for the management of end-user computing: Reexamining the contingencies. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 10:183–211, 1994.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stensland, J., Speedie, S. M., Ideker, M., House, J., and Thompson, T., The relative cost of outpatient telemedicine services. Telemed. J. 5(3):245–256, 1999.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meadows, M. T., and Davis, C., What works. Telemedicine team work cuts transfer costs and generates new revenue. Health Manage. Technol. 19(11):56, 1998.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Krupinski, E. A., LeSueur, B., Ellsworth, L., Levine, N., Hansen, R., Silvis, N., Sarantopoulos, P., Hite, P., Wurzel, J., Weinstein, R. S., Lopez, A. M., Diagnostic accuracy and image quality using a digital camera for teledermatology. Telemed. J. 5(3):257–263, 1999.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Li, M. F., and Ye, L. R., Information technology and firm performance: Linking with environmental, strategic and managerial contexts. Inf. Manage. 35(1):43–51, 1999.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Charles, B. L., Telemedicine can lower costs and improve access. Health Financ. Manage. 54(4):66–69, 2000.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mair, F., and Whitten, P., Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. BMJ 320(7248):1517–1520, 2000.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ferry, J., Virtual doctors on the horizon in Seattle. The Lancet p. 354926, 1999.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Becker, C., Telemedicine system helps manage ICUs. Mod. Healthc. 30(37):62, 2000.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ruggiero, A., Teleradiology Primer, 2000, 2000. 7-17-0200.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hawnaur, J., Recent advances: Diagnostic radiology. BMJ pp. 319168–319171, 1999.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lattimore, M. R., Jr., Astore-forward ophthalmic telemedicine case report from deployed U.S. Army Forces in Kuwait. Telemed. J. 5(3):309–313, 1999.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Garshnek, V., and Hassell, L. H., Evaluating telemedicine in a changing technological era. J. Healthc. Inf. Manage. 13(4):39–47, 1999.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Amatayakul, M., Security and privacy in the health information age. MD Comput. November/ December:51–53, 1999.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sloan, F. A., Valvona, J., Perrin, J. M., and Adamache, K. W., Diffusion of surgical technology. An exploratory study. J. Health Econ. 5(1):31–61, 1986.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kaluzny, A. D., Innovation in health services: Theoretical framework and review of research. Health Serv. Res. 9(2):101–120, 1974.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lee, R. H., and Waldman, D. M., The diffusion of innovations in hospitals. J. Health Econ. 4(4):373–380, 1985.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Romeo, A. A., Wagner, J. L., and Lee, R. H., Prospective reimbursement and the diffusion of new technologies in hospitals. J. Health Econ. 3(1):1–24, 1984.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Baker, L. C., and Wheeler, S. K., Managed care and technology diffusion: The case of MRI. Health Aff. (Millwood.) 17(5):195–207, 1998.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Greer, A. L., Advances in the study of diffusion of innovations in Health Care Organizations. Milbank Memorial Fund, Quarterly 55:505–532, 1977.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Falas, T., Papadopoulos, G., and Stafylopatis, A., A review of decision support systems in telecare. J. Med. Syst. 27(4):347–356, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nir Menachemi
    • 1
  • Darrell E. Burke
    • 2
    Email author
  • Douglas J. Ayers
    • 3
  1. 1.College of MedicineFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  2. 2.School of Information StudiesFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  3. 3.School of Business, Department of Management, Marketing and IDUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA

Personalised recommendations