Search

Introduction: Poor medical information transfer across healthcare visits and providers poses a potential threat to patient safety. Patient‐held health records (PHRs) may be used to facilitate informational continuity, handover communication and patient self‐management. However, there are conflicting opinions on the effectiveness of PHRs, other than in maternal and child care. Moreover, the experiences of users of PHRs in low‐ and middle‐income countries are critical in policy decisions but have rarely been researched. Aim: This study aimed to explore similarities and differences in the perspectives of patients, carers and healthcare providers (HCPs) on the current PHRs for diabetes and hypertension in Kerala. Methods: A qualitative design was used comprising semistructured interviews with patients with diabetes/hypertension (n = 20), carers (n = 15) and HCPs (n = 17) in Kerala, India. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Themes generated regarding the experiences with PHRs from each user group were compared and contrasted. The themes that arose were organized under three headings: use of PHRs in everyday practice; the perceived value of PHR and where practice and value conflict. We found that in the use of PHRs in everyday practice, multiple PHRs posed challenges for patients carrying records and for HCPs locating relevant information. Most carers carried all patients' past PHRs, while patients made decisions on which PHR to take along based on the purpose of the healthcare visit. HCPs appreciated having PHRs but documented limited details in them. The perceived value of PHRs by each group for themselves was different. While HCPs placed value on PHRs for enabling better clinical decision‐making, preventing errors and patient safety, patients perceived them as transactional tools for diabetes and hypertension medications; carers highlighted their value during emergencies. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that users find a variety of values for PHRs. However, these perceived values are different for each user group, suggesting minimal functioning of PHRs for informational continuity, handover communication and self‐management. Patient and Public Involvement: Patients and carers were involved during the pilot testing of topic guides, consent and study information sheets. Patients and carers gave their feedback on the materials to ensure clarity and appropriateness within the context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Revised National Tuberculosis Control Programme (RNTCP), which incorporated the WHO DOTS strategy was introduced in India in the mid-1990s. An operational research project was conducted between 1996 and 1998 to assess the needs and perspectives of patients and providers in two chest clinics in Delhi, Moti Nagar and Nehru Nagar, during the introduction of the new strategy. This paper reports on the findings of the project, concentrating on information collected from 40 in-depth interviews with patient defaulters and from non-participant observations in clinics and directly observed treatment centres. In Moti Nagar chest clinic, 117 of 1786 (6.5%) patients and 195 of 1890 (10%) patients in Nehru Nagar left care before their treatment was complete. It was argued that the reasons for default stem from a poor correlation between patient and programme needs and priorities, and from particular characteristics of the disease and its treatment. Patient needs that were not met by the health system included convenient clinic timings, arrangements for the provision for treatment in the event of a family emergency and provision for complicated cases like alcoholics. The problems facing the provider were poor interpersonal communication with the health staff, lack of attention and support at the clinic, difficulty for patients to re-enter the system if they missed treatment and, in certain areas, long distances to the clinic. Problems related to diseases were inability of the staff to deal with drug side-effects, and patients' conception of equating well-being with cure. Simple, practical measures could improve the provision of tuberculosis (TB) treatment: more flexible hours, allowances for poor patients to reach the clinics and training health care staff for respectful communication and monitoring drug side-effects. The findings indicate a need to rethink the label of 'defaulter' often given to the patients. The important areas for future operational research is also highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]