An intervention designed specifically to meet the needs of a heterogeneous group of chronic disease patients, including those with comorbid conditions, was feasible and beneficial beyond usual care in terms of improved health behaviors and health status. It also resulted in fewer hospitalizations and days of hospitalization.

A low-cost program for promoting health self-management can improve elements of health status while reducing health care costs in populations with diverse chronic diseases.

Objective. To determine the efficacy of an Internet-based Arthritis Self-Management Program (ASMP) as a resource for arthritis patients unable or unwilling to attend small-group ASMPs, which have proven effective in changing healthrelated behaviors and improving health status measures. Methods. Randomized intervention participants were compared with usual care controls at 6 months and 1 year using repeated-measures analyses of variance. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, or fibromyalgia and Internet and e-mail access (n ‫؍‬ 855) were randomized to an intervention (n ‫؍‬ 433) or usual care control (n ‫؍‬ 422) group. Measures included 6 health status variables (pain, fatigue, activity limitation, health distress, disability, and self-reported global health), 4 health behaviors (aerobic exercise, stretching and strengthening exercise, practice of stress management, and communication with physicians), 5 utilization variables (physician visits, emergency room visits, chiropractic visits, physical therapist visits, and nights in hospital), and self-efficacy. Results. At 1 year, the intervention group significantly improved in 4 of 6 health status measures and self-efficacy. No significant differences in health behaviors or health care utilization were found. Conclusion. The Internet-based ASMP proved effective in improving health status measures at 1 year and is a viable alternative to the small-group ASMP.

OBJECTIVEWe hypothesized that people with type 2 diabetes in an online diabetes self-management program, compared with usual-care control subjects, would 1) demonstrate reduced A1C at 6 and 18 months, 2) have fewer symptoms, 3) demonstrate increased exercise, and 4) have improved self-efficacy and patient activation. In addition, participants randomized to listserve reinforcement would have better 18-month outcomes than participants receiving no reinforcement.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA total of 761 participants were randomized to 1) the program, 2) the program with e-mail reinforcement, or 3) were usual-care control subjects (no treatment). This sample included 110 American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/ANs). Analyses of covariance models were used at the 6- and 18-month follow-up to compare groups.RESULTSAt 6 months, A1C, patient activation, and self-efficacy were improved for program participants compared with usual care control subjects (P < 0.05). There were no changes in other health or behavioral indicators. The AI/AN program participants demonstrated improvements in health distress and activity limitation compared with usual-care control subjects. The subgroup with initial A1C >7% demonstrated stronger improvement in A1C (P = 0.01). At 18 months, self-efficacy and patient activation were improved for program participants. A1C was not measured. Reinforcement showed no improvement.CONCLUSIONSAn online diabetes self-management program is acceptable for people with type 2 diabetes. Although the results were mixed they suggest 1) that the program may have beneficial effects in reducing A1C, 2) AI/AN populations can be engaged in and benefit from online interventions, and 3) our follow-up reinforcement appeared to have no value.

The Internet-based CDSMP proved effective in improving health statutes by 1 year and is a viable alternative to the small-group Chronic Disease Self Management Program.

The 2 methods for measuring health status change did not give concordant results. Including patient retrospective assessments in clinical trials might increase the comprehensiveness of information gained and its accord with clinical practice.

Background The use of Internet-based questionnaires for collection of data to evaluate patient education and other interventions has increased in recent years. Many self-report instruments have been validated using paper-and-pencil versions, but we cannot assume that the psychometric properties of an Internet-based version will be identical.Objectives To look at similarities and differences between the Internet versions and the paper-and-pencil versions of 16 existing self-report instruments useful in evaluation of patient interventions.Methods Participants were recruited via the Internet and volunteered to participate (N=397), after which they were randomly assigned to fill out questionnaires online or via mailed paper-and-pencil versions. The self-report instruments measured were overall health, health distress, practice mental stress management, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability, illness intrusiveness, activity limitations, visual numeric for pain, visual numeric for shortness of breath, visual numeric for fatigue, self-efficacy for managing disease, aerobic exercise, stretching and strengthening exercise, visits to MD, hospitalizations, hospital days, and emergency room visits. Means, ranges, and confidence intervals are given for each instrument within each type of questionnaire. The results from the two questionnaires were compared using both parametric and non-parametric tests. Reliability tests were given for multi-item instruments. A separate sample (N=30) filled out identical questionnaires over the Internet within a few days and correlations were used to assess test-retest reliability.Results Out of 16 instruments, none showed significant differences when the appropriate tests were used. Construct reliability was similar within each type of questionnaire, and Internet test-retest reliability was high. Internet questionnaires required less follow-up to achieve a slightly (non-significant) higher completion rate compared to mailed questionnaires.Conclusions Among a convenience sample recruited via the Internet, results from those randomly assigned to Internet participation were at least as good as, if not better than, among those assigned mailed questionnaires, with less recruitment effort required. The instruments administered via the Internet appear to be reliable, and to be answered similarly to the way they are answered when they are administered via traditional mailed paper questionnaires.

An e-mail discussion group can positively affect health status and possibly health care utilization. It may have a place in the treatment of chronic recurrent back pain.