Differing Effects of Implementation Leadership Characteristics on Nurses’ Use of mHealth Technologies in Clinical Practice: Cross-Sectional Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Leadership has been consistently identified as an important factor in shaping the uptake and use of mobile health (mHealth) technologies in nursing; however, the nature and scope of leadership remain poorly delineated. This lack of detail about what leadership entails limits the practical actions that can be taken by leaders to optimize the implementation and use of mHealth technologies among nurses working clinically. Objective This study aimed to examine the effects of first-level leaders’ implementation leadership characteristics on nurses’ intention to use and actual use of mHealth technologies in practice while controlling for nurses’ individual characteristics and the voluntariness of use, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use of mHealth technologies. Methods A cross-sectional exploratory correlational survey study of registered nurses in Canada (n=288) was conducted between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2018. Nurses were eligible to participate if they provided direct care in any setting and used employer-provided mHealth technologies in clinical practice. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted for the 2 outcome variables: intention to use and actual use. Results The implementation leadership characteristics of first-level leaders influenced nurses’ intention to use and actual use of mHealth technologies, with 2 moderating effects found. The final model for intention to use included the interaction term for implementation leadership characteristics and education, explaining 47% of the variance in nurses’ intention to use mHealth in clinical practice (F10,228=20.14; P<.001). An examination of interaction plots found that implementation leadership characteristics had a greater influence on the intention to use mHealth technologies among nurses with a registered nurse diploma or a bachelor of nursing degree than among nurses with a graduate degree or other advanced education. For actual use, implementation leadership characteristics had a significant influence on the actual use of mHealth over and above the control variables (nurses’ demographic characteristics, previous experience with mHealth, and voluntariness) and other known predictors (perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use) in the model without the implementation leadership × age interaction term (β=.22; P=.001) and in the final model that included the implementation leadership × age interaction term (β=−.53; P=.03). The final model explained 40% of the variance in nurses’ actual use of mHealth in their work (F10,228=15.18; P<.001). An examination of interaction plots found that, for older nurses, implementation leadership characteristics had less of an influence on their actual use of mHealth technologies. Conclusions Leaders responsible for the implementation of mHealth technologies need to assess and consider their implementation leadership behaviors because these play a role in influencing nurses’ use of mHealth technologies. The education level and age of nurses may be important factors to consider because different groups may require different approaches to optimize their use of mHealth technologies in clinical practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".