Cancer patients’ experiences of using an Interactive Health Communication Application (IHCA)

Interactive Health Communication Applications (IHCAs) are increasingly used in health care. Studies document that IHCAs provide patients with knowledge and social support, enhance self- efficacy and can improve behavioural and clinical outcomes. However, research exploring patients’ experiences of using IHCAs has been scarce. The aim of this study was to explore cancer patients’ perspectives and experiences related to the use of an IHCA called WebChoice in their homes. Qualitative interviews were conducted with infrequent, medium and frequent IHCA users—six women and four men with breast and prostate cancer. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed inspired by interactionistic perspectives. We found that some patients’ perceived WebChoice as a “friend,” others as a “stranger.” Access to WebChoice stimulated particularly high frequency users to position themselves as “information seeking agents,” assuming an active patient role. However, to position oneself as an “active patient” was ambiguous and emotional. Feelings of “calmness”, “normalization of symptoms”, feelings of “being part of a community”, feeling “upset” and “vulnerable”, as well as “feeling supported” were identified. Interaction with WebChoice implied for some users an increased focus on illness. Our findings indicate that the interaction between patients and an IHCA such as WebChoice occurs in a variety of ways, some of which are ambivalent or conflicting. Particularly for frequent and medium frequency users, it offers support, but may at the same time reinforce an element of uncertainty in their life. Such insights should be taken into consideration in the future development of IHCAs in healthcare in general and in particular for implementation into patients’ private sphere

Handheld Technology to Improve Patient Care: Evaluating a Support System for Preference-based Care Planning at the Bedside

Objective: Despite an increasing movement toward shared decision making and the incorporation of patients' preferences into health care decision making, little research has been done on the development and evaluation of support systems that help clinicians elicit and integrate patients' preferences into patient care. This study evaluates nurses' use of choice, a handheld-computer–based support system for preference-based care planning, which assists nurses in eliciting patients' preferences for functional performance at the bedside. Specifically, it evaluates the effects of system use on nurses' care priorities, preference achievement, and patients' satisfaction. Design: Three-group sequential design with one intervention and two control groups (N=155). In the intervention group, nurses elicited patients' preferences for functional performance with the handheld-computer–based choice application as part of their regular admission interview; preference information was added to patients' charts and used in subsequent care planning. Results: Nurses' use of choice made nursing care more consistent with patient preferences (F=11.4; P<0.001) and improved patients' preference achievement (F=4.9; P<0.05). Furthermore, higher consistency between patients' preferences and nurses' care priorities was associated with higher preference achievement (r=0.49; P<0.001). Conclusion: In this study, the use of a handheld-computer–based support system for preference-based care planning improved patient-centered care and patient outcomes. The technique has potential to be included in clinical practice as part of nurses' routine care planning

Transitions from biomedical to recovery-oriented practices in mental health: a scoping review to explore the role of Internet-based interventions

Abstract Background The Internet is transforming mental health care services by increasing access to, and potentially improving the quality of, care. Internet-based interventions in mental health can potentially play a role in transitions from biomedical to recovery-oriented research and practices, but an overview of what this may entail, current work, and issues that need addressing, is lacking. The objective of this study is to describe Internet-based recovery-oriented interventions (referred to as e-recovery) and current research, and to identify gaps and issues relevant to advancing recovery research and practices through opportunities provided by the Internet. Methods Five iterative stages of a scoping review framework were followed in searching and analyzing the literature. A recovery framework with four domains and 16 themes was used to deductively code intervention characteristics according to their support for recovery-oriented practices. Only Internet-based interventions used in conjunction with ongoing care were included. Results Twenty studies describing six e-recovery interventions were identified and originated in Australia, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway and USA. The domain supporting personal recovery was most clearly reflected in interventions, whereas the last three domains, i.e., promoting citizenship, organizational commitment and working relationship were less evident. Support for the formulation and follow-up of personal goals and preferences, and in accessing peer-support, were the characteristics shared by most interventions. Three of the six studies that employed a comparison group used randomization, and none presented definitive findings. None used recovery-oriented frameworks or specific recovery outcome measures. Four of the interventions were specific to a diagnosis. Conclusion Research about how technologies might aid in illuminating and shaping recovery processes is in its formative stages. We recommend that future e-recovery research and innovation attend to four dimensions: evidence-supported interventions, new knowledge about personal recovery, values-based approaches and Internet as a facilitator for organizational transformation. The incremental changes facilitated by e-recovery may help propel a shift in mental health care toward recovery-oriented practices

Reliability and Validity Issues Related to Interactive Tailored Patient Assessments: A Case Study

Reviewer: Lewis, DeborahReviewer: Streiner, David[This item is a preserved copy and is not necessarily the most recent version. To view the current item, visit http://www.jmir.org/2007/3/e22/ ] : Recently there has been a proliferation of interactive tailored patient assessment (ITPA) tools. However, evidence of the reliability and validity of these instruments is often missing, which makes their value in research studies questionable. Because several of the common methods to evaluate instrument reliability and validity are not applicable to interactive tailored patient assessments, informatics researchers may benefit from some guidance on which methods of reliability and validity assessment they can appropriately use. This paper describes the main differences between interactive tailored patient assessments and assessment instruments based on psychometric, or classical test, theory; it summarizes the measurement techniques normally used to ascertain the validity and reliability of assessment instruments based on psychometric theory; it discusses which methods are appropriate for interactive tailored patient assessments and which are not; and finally, it illustrates the application of some of the feasible techniques with a case study that describes how the reliability and validity of the tailored symptom assessment instrument called Choice were evaluated

Nurses' experiences of using an interactive tailored patient assessment tool one year past implementation

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of benefits, integration of patient-centered communication in clinical practice is challenging. Interactive tailored patient assessment (ITPA) tools can contribute to a more patient-centered care approach. However, little research has examined the impact of such tools on nursing care once they have been implemented. OBJECTIVE: To explore nurses' experiences of the benefits of and barriers to using an ITPA called Choice, in cancer care one year after its implementation. METHODS: This investigation is a part of a larger study examining the use of Choice in cancer care. Four focus group interviews were conducted with 20 nurses experienced in using the Choice application. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Three themes and nine sub-themes emerged: (1) "Choice as facilitator for shared understanding and engagement in patients' own care," with three sub-themes: preparing both patient and nurse for communication, shared engagement in care planning, and giving the patients a voice; (2) "enhancing the patients' strengths," with two sub-themes: releasing patient's internal strengths and confirming "normalcy" for the patient; and (3) "new challenges for the nurse," with four sub-themes: organizational challenges, interactions with technology, a need for training in communication skills, and new ethical challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that, from nurses' perspectives, integration of ITPAs such as Choice in clinical practice offers many benefits that can contribute to patient-centered care. However, to reap these benefits, use of such tools must receive equal priority as other routines, and require sufficient time, space and competence. Choice also challenged nurses' professional roles and created dilemmas such as nurses' ambivalence regarding patients' levels of disclosure of sensitive issues and the nurses' ability to respond to them. Although patient-centered care is advocated as model for good clinical practice, this is not always internalized. Tools such as Choice may help to make such a shift happen.QC 20140123</p

Patients’ reported reasons for non-use of an internet-based patient–provider communication service: qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND: The adoption of Internet-based patient–provider communication services (IPPC) in health care has been slow. Patients want electronic communication, and the quality of health care can be improved by offering such IPPCs. However, the rate of enrollment in such services remains low, and the reasons for this are unclear. Knowledge about the barriers to use is valuable during implementation of IPPCs in the health care services, and it can help timing, targeting, and tailoring IPPCs to different groups of patients. OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to investigate patients’ views of an IPPC that they could use from home to pose questions to nurses and physicians at their treatment facility, and their reported reasons for non-use of the service. METHODS: This qualitative study was based on individual interviews with 22 patients who signed up for, but did not use, the IPPC. RESULTS: Patients appreciated the availability and the possibility of using the IPPC as needed, even if they did not use it. Their reported reasons for not using the IPPC fell into three main categories: (1) they felt that they did not need the IPPC and had sufficient access to information elsewhere, (2) they preferred other types of communication such as telephone or face-to-face contact, or (3) they were hindered by IPPC attributes such as login problems. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were satisfied with having the opportunity to send messages to health care providers through an IPPC, even if they did not use the service. IPPCs should be offered to the patients at an appropriate time in the illness trajectory, both when they need the service and when they are receptive to information about the service. A live demonstration of the IPPC at the point of enrollment might have increased its use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00971139; http://clinicaltrial.gov/ct2/show/NCT00971139 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6KlOiYJrW)