eHealth Activity among African American and White Cancer Survivors: A New Application of Theory

ABSTRACT

eHealth is a promising resource for cancer survivors and may contribute to reducing racial disparities in cancer survivorship. This research applies the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) to examine eHealth activity among African American (AfAm) and White cancer survivors. In a population-based sample of AfAm and White survivors (n = 300), a Poisson regression tested whether UTAUT constructs (facilitating conditions, social influence, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness) and beliefs about security/trustworthiness of eHealth were associated with the number of eHealth activities respondents had used. To test whether the effects varied across racial groups, interactions between each of these five facets and survivor race were included in the model. The model adjusted for demographic characteristics, cancer history, and internet access and use. Across racial groups, facilitating conditions (IRR = 1.44, 95%CI [1.17, 1.77]) and perceived usefulness (IRR = 1.16, 95%CI [1.08, 1.24]) were associated with increased eHealth activity. A marginally significant interaction between race and perceived ease of use (IRR = 1.17, 95%CI [0.99, 1.39]) indicated this perception was associated with decreased eHealth activity for White but not AfAm survivors. A significant interaction between race and perceived security/trustworthiness (IRR = 1.16, 95%CI [1.02, 1.32]) indicated this perception was associated with increased eHealth activity for AfAm but not White survivors. Social influence was not associated with eHealth use for either group (IRR = 1.07, 95%CI [0.98, 1.16]). Interventions targeting attitudes about eHealth may encourage its adoption and use. Furthermore, eHealth tools intended for use among AfAm cancer survivors should ensure they are secure and emphasize trustworthiness to intended users.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Notes

1. A full list of survey items is available from the corresponding author.

2. A third item was intended for use in this scale but was excluded because it was not strongly correlated with the other two items.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [RO1 HS022955-01A]; PI Hayley S. Thompson and by a National Cancer Institute center grant to Karmanos Cancer Center at Wayne State University [P30CA022453].