Bert Vrijhoef

Dr. Bert Vrijhoef

1. Panaxea, Matrix II, Science Park 400, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
+1

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

27Years (2000-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2014 in International Journal of Medical Informatics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SPSebastiaan Peek
Sebastiaan Peek
EWEveline J.M. Wouters
Eveline J.M. Wouters
JHJoost van Hoof
Joost van Hoof
KLKatrien G. Luijkx
Katrien G. Luijkx
HBHennie R. Boeije
Hennie R. Boeije
BVBert Vrijhoef
Bert Vrijhoef
To provide an overview of factors influencing the acceptance of electronic technologies that support aging in place by community-dwelling older adults. Since technology acceptance factors fluctuate over time, a distinction was made between factors in the pre-implementation stage and factors in the post-implementation stage. A systematic review of mixed studies. Seven major scientific databases (including MEDLINE, Scopus and CINAHL) were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) original and peer-reviewed research, (2) qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods research, (3) research in which participants are community-dwelling older adults aged 60 years or older, and (4) research aimed at investigating factors that influence the intention to use or the actual use of electronic technology for aging in place. Three researchers each read the articles and extracted factors. Sixteen out of 2841 articles were included. Most articles investigated acceptance of technology that enhances safety or provides social interaction. The majority of data was based on qualitative research investigating factors in the pre-implementation stage. Acceptance in this stage is influenced by 27 factors, divided into six themes: concerns regarding technology (e.g., high cost, privacy implications and usability factors); expected benefits of technology (e.g., increased safety and perceived usefulness); need for technology (e.g., perceived need and subjective health status); alternatives to technology (e.g., help by family or spouse), social influence (e.g., influence of family, friends and professional caregivers); and characteristics of older adults (e.g., desire to age in place). When comparing these results to qualitative results on post-implementation acceptance, our analysis showed that some factors are persistent while new factors also emerge. Quantitative results showed that a small number of variables have a significant influence in the pre-implementation stage. Fourteen out of the sixteen included articles did not use an existing technology acceptance framework or model. Acceptance of technology in the pre-implementation stage is influenced by multiple factors. However, post-implementation research on technology acceptance by community-dwelling older adults is scarce and most of the factors in this review have not been tested by using quantitative methods. Further research is needed to determine if and how the factors in this review are interrelated, and how they relate to existing models of technology acceptance.

5 June 2015 in Gerontology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SPSebastiaan Peek
Sebastiaan Peek
KLKatrien G. Luijkx
Katrien G. Luijkx
MRMaurice D. Rijnaard
Maurice D. Rijnaard
MNMarianne E. Nieboer
Marianne E. Nieboer
CVClaire S. van der Voort
Claire S. van der Voort
EWEveline J.M. Wouters
Eveline J.M. Wouters
Background: Most older adults prefer to age in place, and supporting older adults to remain in their own homes and communities is also favored by policy makers. Technology can play a role in staying independent, active and healthy. However, the use of technology varies considerably among older adults. Previous research indicates that current models of technology acceptance are missing essential predictors specific to community-dwelling older adults. Furthermore, in situ research within the specific context of aging in place is scarce, while this type of research is needed to better understand how and why community-dwelling older adults are using technology. Objective: To explore which factors influence the level of use of various types of technology by older adults who are aging in place and to describe these factors in a comprehensive model. Methods: A qualitative explorative field study was set up, involving home visits to 53 community-dwelling older adults, aged 68-95, living in the Netherlands. Purposive sampling was used to include participants with different health statuses, living arrangements, and levels of technology experience. During each home visit: (1) background information on the participants' chronic conditions, major life events, frailty, cognitive functioning, subjective health, ownership and use of technology was gathered, and (2) a semistructured interview was conducted regarding reasons for the level of use of technology. The study was designed to include various types of technology that could support activities of daily living, personal health or safety, mobility, communication, physical activity, personal development, and leisure activities. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze interview transcripts. Results: The level of technology use in the context of aging in place is influenced by six major themes: challenges in the domain of independent living; behavioral options; personal thoughts on technology use; influence of the social network; influence of organizations, and the role of the physical environment. Conclusion: Older adults' perceptions and use of technology are embedded in their personal, social, and physical context. Awareness of these psychological and contextual factors is needed in order to facilitate aging in place through the use of technology. A conceptual model covering these factors is presented.

27 March 2012 in European Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JHJeroen M.H Hendriks
Jeroen M.H Hendriks
RWRianne de Wit
Rianne de Wit
HCHarry J.G.M. Crijns
Harry J.G.M. Crijns
BVBert Vrijhoef
Bert Vrijhoef
MPMartin H. Prins
Martin H. Prins
RTRobert G. Tieleman
Robert G. Tieleman
Aims The management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is often inadequate due to deficient adherence to the guidelines. A nurse-led AF clinic providing integrated chronic care to improve guideline adherence and activate patients in their role, may effectively reduce morbidity and mortality but such care has not been tested in a large randomized trial. Therefore, we performed a randomized clinical trial to compare the AF clinic with routine clinical care in patients with AF. Methods and results We randomly assigned 712 patients with AF to nurse-led care and usual care. Nurse-led care consisted of guidelines based, software supported integrated chronic care supervised by a cardiologist. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular hospitalization and cardiovascular death. Duration of follow-up was at least 12 months. Adherence to guideline recommendations was significantly better in the nurse-led care group. After a mean of 22 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 14.3% of 356 patients of the nurse-led care group compared with 20.8% of 356 patients receiving usual care [hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45–0.93; P= 0.017]. Cardiovascular death occurred in 1.1% in the nurse-led care vs. 3.9% in the usual care group (hazard ratio: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.09–0.85; P= 0.025). Cardiovascular hospitalization amounted (13.5 vs. 19.1%, respectively, hazard ratio: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46–0.96, P= 0.029). Conclusion Nurse-led care of patients with AF is superior to usual care provided by a cardiologist in terms of cardiovascular hospitalizations and cardiovascular mortality. Trial registration information: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier number: NCT00391872.

28 January 2015 in International Journal of Integrated Care
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PVPim Peter Valentijn
Pim Peter Valentijn
IBInge C. Boesveld
Inge C. Boesveld
DKDenise M. Van der Klauw
Denise M. Van der Klauw
DRDirk Ruwaard
Dirk Ruwaard
JSJeroen N. Struijs
Jeroen N. Struijs
BVBert Vrijhoef
Bert Vrijhoef
Building integrated services in a primary care setting is considered an essential important strategy for establishing a high-quality and affordable health care system. The theoretical foundations of such integrated service models are described by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care, which distinguishes six integration dimensions (clinical, professional, organisational, system, functional and normative integration). The aim of the present study is to refine the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care by developing a taxonomy that specifies the underlying key features of the six dimensions. First, a literature review was conducted to identify features for achieving integrated service delivery. Second, a thematic analysis method was used to develop a taxonomy of key features organised into the dimensions of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. Finally, the appropriateness of the key features was tested in a Delphi study among Dutch experts. The taxonomy consists of 59 key features distributed across the six integration dimensions of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. Key features associated with the clinical, professional, organisational and normative dimensions were considered appropriate by the experts. Key features linked to the functional and system dimensions were considered less appropriate. This study contributes to the ongoing debate of defining the concept and typology of integrated care. This taxonomy provides a development agenda for establishing an accepted scientific framework of integrated care from an end-user, professional, managerial and policy perspective.

3 May 2016 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SPSebastiaan Peek
Sebastiaan Peek
Eveline WoutersEveline Wouters
Eveline Wouters
KLKatrien Luijkx
Katrien Luijkx
BVBert Vrijhoef
Bert Vrijhoef
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

1 April 2006 in Primary Care Respiratory Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LSLotte Steuten
Lotte Steuten
ECEva C. Creutzberg
Eva C. Creutzberg
BVBert Vrijhoef
Bert Vrijhoef
EWEmiel F. Wouters
Emiel F. Wouters