Healthtech has become a nascent sector of the internet economy since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Telemedicine features are facilitated, such as teleconsultation, e-diagnosis, e-prescribing, and e-pharmacy. However, the intention to use digital health services in Indonesia is still underdeveloped though the sales of other risk-free e-commerce products are high enough.
OBJECTIVE:
This study aims to assess the human perception of perceived value and social influences regarding the intention to use digital health services.
METHODS:
Google Forms web link is employed to disseminate a set of 4-Point Likert scale questionnaires. In total, 364 complete responses are collected. A descriptive approach is employed to process the data using Microsoft Excel and SPSS software. Validity and reliability are quantified using the item total-correlation method and Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient.
RESULTS:
Only 87 respondents (24%) ever used digital health services, of which Halodoc (92%) is the most preferred application, and teleconsultation became the most popular service to access. Out of four, the average score is 3.16 for perceived value and 2.86 for the social influence dimension.
CONCLUSION:
Most respondents, not dependent on user experience, perceive more values obtained using digital health services, such as time and money savings, convenience, flexible order time, undiscovered identity, adventurous experience, and enjoyment. Another finding of this research proves that some social influences from family, friends, and mass media also bring effect to amplify the intention to use. A low level of trust is assumed to be the cause of a small number of users.
PatroCS. Influence of perceived benefits and risks on consumers’ perceived value in online shopping. International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics. 2019;8(3):12–36. doi:10.4018/ijabe.2019070102.
2.
ErogluE. The Changing Shopping Culture: internet consumer behavior. Review of Business Information Systems (RBIS). 2014;18(1):35–40. doi:10.19030/rbis.v18i1.8541.
3.
KumarREjazAAsimS. Satisfaction, perceived usability and trust impact on website trustworthiness. International Journal of Computer Applications. 2019;178(23):50–7. doi:10.5120/ijca2019919106.
4.
TerziuH. The role of the internet in the development of marketing and electronic services in business. European Journal of Economics and Business Studies. 2020;6(2):1. doi:10.26417/451fzx75d.
5.
YuJ. Marketing to Chinese consumers on the internet. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. 2006;24(4):380–92. doi:10.1108/02634500610672116.
6.
SultanaNTamannaM. Exploring the benefits and challenges of internet of things (IOT) during COVID-19: A case study of Bangladesh. Discover Internet of Things. 2021;1. doi:10.1007/s43926-021-00020-9.
7.
GruborAJaksaO. Internet marketing as a business necessity. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems. 2018;16(2):265–74. doi:10.7906/indecs.16.2.6.
ChiesaVCOVID-19 pandemic: Health impact of staying at home, social distancing and ‘lockdown’ measures - A systematic review of systematic reviews. Journal of Public Health. 2021;43(4):1–20. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdab102.
10.
PayanDDTelemedicine implementation and use in community health centers during COVID-19: Clinic personnel and Patient Perspectives. SSM - Qualitative Research in Health. 2022;2:100054. doi:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100054.
11.
ShinPSharacJJacobsF. Provision of telemedicine services by community health centers. Online Journal of Public Health Informatics. 2014;6(2):185. doi:10.5210/ojphi.v6i2.5421.
12.
SusannaD. When will the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia end?Kesmas: National Public Health Journal. 2020;15(4):160–2. doi:10.21109/kesmas.v15i4.4361.
13.
AlghamdiNSAlghamdiSM. The role of digital technology in curbing COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2022;19(14):8287. doi:10.3390/ijerph19148287.
14.
BojanicDC. An examination of the means-end model of price, quality and value in the serviceProceedings of the 1996 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. In: WilsonEJHairJF (eds) \unskip. Cham: Springer; 2014. pp. 163–3.
15.
GanCWangW. The influence of perceived value on purchase intention in social commerce context. Internet Research. 2017;27(4):772–85. doi:10.1108/intr-06-2016-0164.
16.
EvelinaTYThe influence of utilitarian value, hedonic value, social value, and perceived risk on customer satisfaction: Survey of e-commerce customers in Indonesia. Business: Theory and Practice. 2020;21(2):613–22. doi:10.3846/btp.2020.12143.
17.
BhattacherjeeA. Acceptance of e-commerce services: The case of electronic brokerages. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics — Part A. Systems and Humans. 2000;30(4):411–20. doi:10.1109/3468.852435.
18.
BPS. Statistik Indonesia 2021. Jakarta: Badan Pusat Statistik; 2022.
19.
PriceLR. Psychometric Methods: Theory Into Practice. New York: The Guilford Press; 2017.
20.
CronbachLJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297–334. doi:10.1007/bf02310555.
21.
AlsadounAAIskandarYHPTangiisuranB. Exploring the factors that influence the adoption of online pharmacy in Saudi Arabia: a conceptual review. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology. 2020;29(10):262–9. doi:10.31838/jcr.07.16.43.
22.
ChordiyaSVGargeBM. E-pharmacy vs Conventional Pharmacy. IP International Journal of Comprehensive and Advanced Pharmacology. 2018;3(4):121–3. doi:10.18231/2456-9542.2018.0027.
23.
RoshiniAPavithraGMVenugopalN. E-pharmacy – a boon or Bane. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 2021;13(2):1800–5. doi:10.31838/ijpr/2021.13.02.246.
UribeFARHealth knowledge, health behaviors and attitudes during pandemic emergencies: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2021;16(9):e0256731. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256731.
26.
GhodseH. Ghodse’s Drugs and Addictive Behaviour: A Guide to Treatment. 4th ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2010.
27.
AlwonBMSolomonGHussainFWrightDJ. A detailed analysis of online pharmacy characteristics to inform safe usage by patients. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy. 2015;37(1):148–58. doi:10.1007/s11096-014-0056-1.
28.
ChoYCSagynovE. Exploring factors that affect usefulness, ease of use, trust, and purchase intention in the online environment. International Journal of Management & Information Systems. 2015;19(1):21–36. doi:10.19030/ijmis.v19i1.9086.
29.
LeeMKOTurbanE. A trust model for consumer internet shopping. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 2001;6(1):75–91. doi:10.1080/10864415.2001.11044227.
30.
FerrerRAKleinWM. Risk perceptions and health behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2015;5:85–9. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.012.
31.
WangYDEmurianHH. An overview of online trust: Concepts, elements, and implications. Computers in Human Behavior. 2005;21(1):105–25. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2003.11.008.
32.
PodnarKJavernikP. The effect of word of mouth on consumers’ attitudes toward products and their purchase probability. Journal of Promotion Management. 2012;18(2):145–68. doi:10.1080/10496491.2012.668426.
33.
HajliNA Social Commerce Investigation of the role of trust in a social networking site on purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research. 2017;71:133–41. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.004.
34.
HidayatRAnasisNS. Analysis of E-service quality on website e-commerce on E-customer satisfactionProceedings of the First International Conference on Applied Science and Technology (iCAST 2018) [Preprint]. Atlantis Press; 2020.
35.
KimYPetersonRA. A Meta-analysis of Online Trust Relationships in E-commerce. Journal of Interactive Marketing. 2017;38:44–54. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.001.
36.
AjzenI. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991;50(2):179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
37.
FishbeinMAjzen1. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Massachusetts: Addison Wesley; 1975.
38.
VenkateshVDavisFD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences. 1996;27(3):451–81. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x.
39.
PathakVKPathakA. Understanding perceived risk: a case study of green electronic consumer products. management insight. The Journal of Incisive Analysers. 2017;13(1):33–7. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x.
