Human Readiness for Stroke Telemedicine in a Greek Island Network: A Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 2
Sevasti Chatzidaki, Konstantinos Anargyros, Theodoros Xanthos
{"title":"Human Readiness for Stroke Telemedicine in a Greek Island Network: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Sevasti Chatzidaki, Konstantinos Anargyros, Theodoros Xanthos","doi":"10.1177/15305627261492660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ischemic stroke outcome depends on treatment speed, delayed in remote island areas by limited neurological coverage and patient transfer. Telemedicine offers remote support, but implementation depends on staff readiness (knowledge, attitudes, and exposure), undescribed in the Greek island context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional survey of 135 health professionals (convenience sample) in an island hub-and-spoke network of 12 National Health System facilities; all self-reported. Two cross-culturally adapted instruments were used: the Acute Stroke Management Questionnaire (23-item knowledge score) and an attitude questionnaire based on diffusion of innovations theory. Analysis included reliability, correlation, group comparison, factor, and regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stroke knowledge scores were relatively high (mean 3.95), lowest in advanced management, and differed by professional role (<i>p</i> = 0.015). Parallel analysis supported two correlated attitude factors rather than five: perceived value and usability (mean 3.57) and local visibility and workflow fit (mean 2.75), a gap of 0.82 points (<i>p</i> < 0.001). All had heard of telemedicine, but only 63% had seen a system in use. Prior exposure was associated with a more positive attitude bivariately (<i>p</i> = 0.016) but not after adjustment. Knowledge was associated with overall attitude (Spearman's <i>ρ</i> = 0.322; Pearson's <i>r</i> = 0.462; both <i>p</i> < 0.001) and with perceived value and usability (<i>ρ</i> = 0.435), but not with local visibility and workflow fit (<i>ρ</i> = 0.061).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this self-selected sample, knowledge was associated with general appraisal of telemedicine, whereas no clear rank association was detected with perceived local integration. These exploratory findings identify targets for further evaluation without establishing the effects of education or organizational change.</p>","PeriodicalId":520784,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","volume":" ","pages":"15305627261492660"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15305627261492660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ischemic stroke outcome depends on treatment speed, delayed in remote island areas by limited neurological coverage and patient transfer. Telemedicine offers remote support, but implementation depends on staff readiness (knowledge, attitudes, and exposure), undescribed in the Greek island context.

Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 135 health professionals (convenience sample) in an island hub-and-spoke network of 12 National Health System facilities; all self-reported. Two cross-culturally adapted instruments were used: the Acute Stroke Management Questionnaire (23-item knowledge score) and an attitude questionnaire based on diffusion of innovations theory. Analysis included reliability, correlation, group comparison, factor, and regression.

Results: Stroke knowledge scores were relatively high (mean 3.95), lowest in advanced management, and differed by professional role (p = 0.015). Parallel analysis supported two correlated attitude factors rather than five: perceived value and usability (mean 3.57) and local visibility and workflow fit (mean 2.75), a gap of 0.82 points (p < 0.001). All had heard of telemedicine, but only 63% had seen a system in use. Prior exposure was associated with a more positive attitude bivariately (p = 0.016) but not after adjustment. Knowledge was associated with overall attitude (Spearman's ρ = 0.322; Pearson's r = 0.462; both p < 0.001) and with perceived value and usability (ρ = 0.435), but not with local visibility and workflow fit (ρ = 0.061).

Conclusions: In this self-selected sample, knowledge was associated with general appraisal of telemedicine, whereas no clear rank association was detected with perceived local integration. These exploratory findings identify targets for further evaluation without establishing the effects of education or organizational change.

人类准备中风远程医疗在希腊岛网络:横断面研究。
背景:缺血性脑卒中的结果取决于治疗速度,在偏远岛屿地区,由于有限的神经学覆盖和患者转移而延迟。远程医疗提供远程支持,但实施取决于工作人员的准备情况(知识、态度和接触),这在希腊岛屿的情况中有所描述。方法:在一个由12个国家卫生系统设施组成的岛屿中心辐射型网络中,对135名卫生专业人员(方便样本)进行横断面调查;所有的自我报告。采用了两种跨文化适应的工具:急性脑卒中管理问卷(23项知识评分)和基于创新扩散理论的态度问卷。分析包括信度、相关性、组间比较、因子分析和回归分析。结果:脑卒中知识得分较高(平均3.95分),高级管理人员得分最低,不同职业角色差异有统计学意义(p = 0.015)。平行分析支持两个相关的态度因素,而不是五个:感知价值和可用性(平均3.57)和局部可见性和工作流程契合(平均2.75),差距为0.82点(p < 0.001)。所有人都听说过远程医疗,但只有63%的人看到系统在使用。先前暴露与更积极的态度有双变量相关(p = 0.016),但调整后无相关。知识与整体态度相关(Spearman的ρ = 0.322; Pearson的r = 0.462;均p < 0.001),与感知价值和可用性相关(ρ = 0.435),但与局部可见性和工作流程适合性无关(ρ = 0.061)。结论:在这个自我选择的样本中,知识与远程医疗的一般评价相关,而与感知的局部整合没有明显的等级关联。这些探索性发现确定了进一步评估的目标,而没有确定教育或组织变革的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书