Technology Acceptance and User Experience of a Quick Response (QR) Code Feedback System in the Provincial Department of Health Office Apayao Setting

Authors

  • RYAN GARROTE APAYAO STATE COLLEGE Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64358/jstgpa.v2i2.48

Keywords:

QR code feedback system, technology acceptance, user experience, public health office, data privacy, digital feedback

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the technological adoption and user experience of the Quick Response (QR) code feedback system at the Provincial Department of Health Office Apayao. In the current study, we will use a mixed-methods survey research approach, focusing primarily on the quantitative dimension. Study population: The study population will consist of health staff and agency clients who have used the QR code feedback system during a three-month period. The researcher will administer a standardized survey questionnaire to investigate perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, accessibility, convenience, data privacy and security, and overall user experience. Open-ended questions will also reveal the common challenges, worries and suggestions of the responders. The study is based on the input-process-output paradigm, together with the technological acceptance model and user experience principles. The study aims to determine the level of acceptance and usability of the QR code feedback system, compare the views of health staff and agency clients, and identify factors that hinder its adoption. The findings can give useful ideas to improve digital feedback systems in public health offices.

References

REFFERENCES

1.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

2.Halpern, L. M., Zhang, D.-A., & Velarde, A. (2022). Survey response rates to a self-initiated longitudinal survey accessed by a quick response code. Cureus.

3.International Organization for Standardization. (2019). ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Human-centred design for interactive systems.

4.Kemp, S. (2024). Digital 2024: The Philippines. DataReportal.

5.Kuek, A., & Hakkennes, S. (2020). Healthcare staff digital literacy levels and their attitudes towards information systems. Health Informatics Journal, 26(1), 592–612.

6.Mollaei, A., Tabari-Khomeiran, R., Maroufizadeh, S., & SedghiSabet, M. (2024). Adoption of quick response codes as a digital microlearning tool among clinical nurses: A quasi-experimental study. BMC Medical Education, 24, Article 1266.

7.Nichols, E. (2024). Usability of Quick Response (QR) Code as a method to access a survey using a smartphone. U.S. Census Bureau.

8.Nielsen, J. (1993). Response time limits. Nielsen Norman Group.

9.Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann.

10.OECD. (2022). Good practice principles for public service design and delivery in the digital age. OECD.

11.Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2015). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction (4th ed.). Wiley.

12.Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

13.Womack, J. J., et al. (2018). Testing Quick Response (QR) codes as an innovation to improve feedback. Family Medicine.

14.World Health Organization. (2021). Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025. World Health Organization.

15.World Wide Web Consortium. (2018). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. W3C.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30