JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Mobile health (mHealth) applications are increasingly promoted as tools to support access, efficiency, and continuity of care across behavioral health and primary care settings. While patient engagement with mHealth technologies has been widely studied, clinicians play a critical role in determining whether these tools are recommended and sustained in practice. Understanding clinician acceptance of mHealth applications is therefore central to human factors considerations related to digital health design and healthcare workforce readiness.

Objective:

This study examined clinicians’ acceptance of mHealth applications using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), with particular attention to provider role, personal experience with mHealth technologies, and years of clinical experience.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study analyzed survey data from 59 clinicians practicing in integrated care settings in the United States, including primary care physicians and behavioral health providers. Clinicians completed a modified TAM questionnaire assessing perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude toward use, facilitating conditions, and intention to use mHealth applications. Descriptive statistics characterized overall acceptance. Group differences by provider role and personal mHealth use were examined using independent-samples t tests with Hedges’ g effect sizes. Associations with years of clinical experience and between TAM constructs and intention to use were examined using Pearson correlations with 95% confidence intervals. Analyses emphasized effect sizes and estimate precision rather than causal inference.

Results:

Overall, clinicians reported neutral to moderately favorable perceptions of mHealth applications across TAM constructs. Acceptance did not differ meaningfully by provider role, with effect sizes that were uniformly small and imprecisely estimated across subscales. Clinicians who reported personal use of mHealth applications demonstrated more favorable perceptions of perceived usefulness (g = −0.65), perceived ease of use (g = −0.62), and attitude toward use (g = −0.55) compared with those reporting no personal use. Greater years of clinical experience were modestly associated with less favorable attitudes toward mHealth adoption (r = 0.28, 95% CI 0.02–0.50). Exploratory analyses indicated that perceived usefulness showed the strongest association with intention to use mHealth applications (r = 0.68), followed by perceived ease of use and attitude toward use.

Conclusions:

Clinicians practicing in integrated care settings demonstrated cautious openness toward mHealth applications, with acceptance shaped more by personal experience and professional tenure than by provider role. Personal familiarity with mHealth technologies was associated with more favorable perceptions of usability and value, suggesting that experiential exposure may be an important pathway for improving clinician acceptance. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of human factors and workforce readiness considerations in the design and introduction of mHealth applications within healthcare settings.