Search

Modifiable health risk behaviors such as smoking, overweight and obesity, risky alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and poor nutrition contribute to a substantial proportion of the world’s morbidity and mortality burden. General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in identifying and managing modifiable health risk behaviors. However, these are often underdetected and undermanaged in the primary care setting. We describe the potential of eHealth to help patients and GPs to overcome some of the barriers to managing health risk behaviors. In particular, we discuss (1) the role of eHealth in facilitating routine collection of patient-reported data on lifestyle risk factors, and (2) the role of eHealth in improving clinical management of identified risk factors through provision of tailored feedback, point-of-care reminders, tailored educational materials, and referral to online self-management programs. Strategies to harness the capacity of the eHealth medium, including the use of dynamic features and tailoring to help end users engage with, understand, and apply information need to be considered and maximized. Finally, the potential challenges in implementing eHealth solutions in the primary care setting are discussed. In conclusion, there is significant potential for innovative eHealth solutions to make a contribution to improving preventive care in the primary care setting. However, attention to issues such as data security and designing eHealth interfaces that maximize engagement from end users will be important to moving this field forward.

BackgroundWith increasing attention given to the quality of chronic disease care, a measurement approach that empowers consumers to participate in improving quality of care and enables health services to systematically introduce patient-centered initiatives is needed. A Web-based survey with complex adaptive questioning and interactive survey items would allow consumers to easily identify and prioritize detailed service initiatives. ObjectiveThe aim was to develop and test a Web-based survey capable of identifying and prioritizing patient-centered initiatives in chronic disease outpatient services. Testing included (1) test-retest reliability, (2) patient-perceived acceptability of the survey content and delivery mode, and (3) average completion time, completion rates, and Flesch-Kincaid reading score. MethodsIn Phase I, the Web-based Consumer Preferences Survey was developed based on a structured literature review and iterative feedback from expert groups of service providers and consumers. The touchscreen survey contained 23 general initiatives, 110 specific initiatives available through adaptive questioning, and a relative prioritization exercise. In Phase II, a pilot study was conducted within 4 outpatient clinics to evaluate the reliability properties, patient-perceived acceptability, and feasibility of the survey. Eligible participants were approached to complete the survey while waiting for an appointment or receiving intravenous therapy. The age and gender of nonconsenters was estimated to ascertain consent bias. Participants with a subsequent appointment within 14 days were asked to complete the survey for a second time. ResultsA total of 741 of 1042 individuals consented to participate (71.11% consent), 529 of 741 completed all survey content (78.9% completion), and 39 of 68 completed the test-retest component. Substantial or moderate reliability (Cohen’s kappa>0.4) was reported for 16 of 20 general initiatives with observed percentage agreement ranging from 82.1%-100.0%. The majority of participants indicated the Web-based survey was easy to complete (97.9%, 531/543) and comprehensive (93.1%, 505/543). Participants also reported the interactive relative prioritization exercise was easy to complete (97.0%, 189/195) and helped them to decide which initiatives were of most importance (84.6%, 165/195). Average completion time was 8.54 minutes (SD 3.91) and the Flesch-Kincaid reading level was 6.8. Overall, 84.6% (447/529) of participants indicated a willingness to complete a similar survey again. ConclusionsThe Web-based Consumer Preferences Survey is sufficiently reliable and highly acceptable to patients. Based on completion times and reading level, this tool could be integrated in routine clinical practice and allows consumers to easily participate in quality evaluation. Results provide a comprehensive list of patient-prioritized initiatives for patients with major chronic conditions and delivers practice-ready evidence to guide improvements in patient-centered care.

BackgroundEffective communication with cancer patients and their families about their disease, treatment options, and possible outcomes may improve psychosocial outcomes. However, traditional approaches to providing information to patients, including verbal information and written booklets, have a number of shortcomings centered on their limited ability to meet patient preferences and literacy levels. New-generation Web-based technologies offer an innovative and pragmatic solution for overcoming these limitations by providing a platform for interactive information seeking, information sharing, and user-centered tailoring. ObjectiveThe primary goal of this paper is to discuss the advantages of comprehensive and iterative Web-based technologies for health information provision and propose a four-phase framework for the development of Web-based information tools. MethodsThe proposed framework draws on our experience of constructing a Web-based information tool for hematological cancer patients and their families. The framework is based on principles for the development and evaluation of complex interventions and draws on the Agile methodology of software programming that emphasizes collaboration and iteration throughout the development process. ResultsThe DoTTI framework provides a model for a comprehensive and iterative approach to the development of Web-based informational tools for patients. The process involves 4 phases of development: (1) Design and development, (2) Testing early iterations, (3) Testing for effectiveness, and (4) Integration and implementation. At each step, stakeholders (including researchers, clinicians, consumers, and programmers) are engaged in consultations to review progress, provide feedback on versions of the Web-based tool, and based on feedback, determine the appropriate next steps in development. ConclusionsThis 4-phase framework is evidence-informed and consumer-centered and could be applied widely to develop Web-based programs for a diverse range of diseases.

BackgroundMeeting the psychosocial needs of vulnerable groups such as cancer survivors remains an ongoing challenge. This is particularly so for those who have less access to the usual forms of medical specialist and in-person support networks. Internet-based approaches offer an opportunity to better meet patients’ information and support needs by overcoming the barrier of geographic isolation. ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to assess the reported level of access to the Internet, preferred sources of information, and preferred sources of support among survivors of hematologic cancers. MethodA population-based, Australian state cancer registry invited eligible survivors to complete a survey about psychosocial needs, including items measuring Internet access and patterns of use. Of the 732 eligible survivors invited to participate, 268 (36.6%) completed and returned the pen-and-paper-based survey. ResultsThe majority of participants (186/254, 73.2%) reported a high level of access to the Internet, with higher Internet access associated with a higher level of education, larger household, younger age, and being married or employed. A total of 62.2% (156/251) of survivors indicated they were likely to use the Internet for accessing information, with the percentage much lower (69/251, 28%) for accessing support via the Internet. Likelihood of using the Internet for support was associated with feeling anxious and being employed. ConclusionsWhile the Internet appears to offer promise in increasing equitable access to information and support for cancer survivors for both metropolitan and regional areas, it is viewed less favorably for support and by particular subgroups (eg, older people and those without a university degree) within the survivor population. Promoting greater understanding of this mode of support may be required to achieve its potential. Information and support options other than Web-based approaches may continue to be needed by vulnerable groups of cancer survivors.