Mobile Technology Utilization Among Patients From Diverse Cultural and Linguistic Backgrounds Attending Cardiac Rehabilitation in Australia: Descriptive, Case-Matched Comparative Study

Abstract

BackgroundBarriers to attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR), including cultural and linguistic differences, may be addressed by recent technological developments. However, the feasibility of using these approaches in culturally and linguistically diverse patients is yet to be determined.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the use of mobile technologies and features, as well as confidence in utilization across patients speaking different languages at home (ie, English, Mandarin Chinese, and a language other than English and Mandarin [other]) and are both eligible and physically suitable for CR. In addition, the study aims to determine the sociodemographic correlates of the mobile technology/feature use, including language spoken at home in the three groups mentioned above.MethodsThis is a descriptive, case matched, comparative study. Age and gender-matched patients speaking English, Mandarin and other languages (n=30/group) eligible for CR were surveyed for their mobile technology and mobile feature use.Results‘Participants had a mean age of 66.7 years (SD 13, n=90, range 46-95), with 53.3% (48/90) male. The majority (82/90, 91.1%) used at least one technology device, with 87.8% (79/90) using mobile devices, the most common being smartphones (57/90, 63.3%), tablets (28/90, 31.1%), and text/voice-only phones (24/90, 26.7%). More English-speaking participants used computers than Mandarin or “other” language speaking participants (P=.003 and .02) and were more confident in doing so compared to Mandarin-speaking participants (P=.003). More Mandarin-speaking participants used smartphones compared with “other” language speaking participants (P=.03). Most commonly used mobile features were voice calls (77/82, 93.9%), text message (54/82, 65.9%), the internet (39/82, 47.6%), email (36/82, 43.9%), and videoconferencing (Skype or FaceTime [WeChat or QQ] 35/82, 42.7%). Less Mandarin-speaking participants used emails (P=.001) and social media (P=.007) than English-speaking participants. Speaking Mandarin was independently associated with using smartphone, emails, and accessing the web-based medication information (OR 7.238, 95% CI 1.262-41.522; P=.03, OR 0.089, 95% CI 0.016-0.490; P=.006 and OR 0.191, 95% CI 0.037-0.984; P=.05).ConclusionsThis study reveals a high usage of mobile technology among CR patients and provides further insights into differences in the technology use across CALD patients in Australia. The findings of this study may inform the design and implementation of future technology-based CR.

Access, Readiness and Willingness to Engage in Allied Health Telerehabilitation Services for Adults: Does Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Make a Difference?

“…Firstly, the results, contrasting with previous studies by [ 14 , 18 , 19 ], suggest that people from CALD backgrounds have similar access, readiness and willingness to engage in telerehabilitation as compared to people from non-CALD backgrounds. In support of our findings, there has been one study by Zhang and colleagues (2018) [ 32 ], who evaluated the technology use between people from CALD and non-CALD groups and found that even though usage pattern of technologies may be different, the level of access to technology was comparable between CALD and non-CALD groups. This raises the question as to why previous studies have found that people from CALD group were less likely to use telerehabilitation.…”

Selection of private or public hospital care: examining the care-seeking behaviour of patients with private health insurance

“…Finally, logistic regression was employed to determine the factors influencing hospital choice by different types of patients. This approach is commonly used [37,38] to predict a categorical (mainly dichotomous) variable with a mix of continuous and categorical predictor variables [37,39]. The regression model here predicts the probability of admission as a public patient whilst holding PHI cover.…”

Definitions of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD): A Literature Review of Epidemiological Research in Australia

“…Such studies are likely to explore language barriers, which is one of the most important challenges for CALD people. A limitation of defining CALD by LSAH is that it might be affected by acculturation [ 58 ]. Specifically, children of immigrants (from CALD backgrounds) living in Australia for many years might report English as LSAH [ 52 ]; therefore, they would be misclassified as the non-CALD group.…”