Search

Background: Practice based research networks (PBRNs) are increasingly used as a tool for evidence based practice. We developed and tested the feasibility of using software to enable online collection of patient data within a chiropractic PBRN to support clinical decision making and research in participating clinics. Purpose: To assess the feasibility of using online software to collect quality patient information. Methods: The study consisted of two phases: 1) Assessment of the quality of information provided, using a standardized form; and 2) Exploration of patients' perspectives and experiences regarding online information provision through semi-structured interviews. Data analysis was descriptive. Results: Forty-five new patients were recruited. Thirty-six completed online forms, which were submitted by an appropriate person 100% of the time, with an error rate of less than 1%, and submitted in a timely manner 83% of the time. Twenty-one participants were interviewed. Overall, online forms were preferred given perceived security, ease of use, and enabling provision of more accurate information. Conclusions: Use of online software is feasible, provides high quality information, and is preferred by most participants. A pen-and-paper format should be available for patients with this preference and in case of technical difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Interest in citizens' juries for eliciting the views of the public to inform coverage decisions on new health technologies has grown. However, evaluative information, particularly regarding their short- and/or longer-term impact on participants' views is limited. As citizens' juries can be resource intensive, such information is required to make 'evidence-based' decisions about their use. Objectives To assess the impact of citizens' juries on participants' preferences for the distribution of health care across populations over time. Setting and participants Two citizens' juries, involving a different representative sample of the public, were held. Participants completed identical questionnaires before (T1), directly after (T2) and 6 weeks following the jury (T3). Questionnaires comprised rating, ranking and choice-based questions related to four characteristics of competing patient populations (age, current health, life expectancy without treatment and health gain resulting from an intervention). Semi-structured telephone interviews were also conducted to explore the impact of the jury on participants' distributive preferences. Changes in responses to the self-administered survey over the three time points were assessed quantitatively, while interview questions were analysed using qualitative techniques. Results No significant differences in responses to rating questions were observed. Pre/post-jury changes in the rankings of two factors were statistically significant in one of the juries. However, in both juries, T1-T2 changes in responses to several of the choice-based questions reached statistical significance. The number was lower between T2 and T3, suggesting that jurors retained their views. According to findings from the interviews, jurors' views changed or were clarified through participation in the jury. Conclusions There appears to be evidence suggesting that the views of individuals who participate in citizens' juries change as a result of the experience, and those 'informed' views are sustained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]