A randomized controlled trial of nurse follow-up clinics: do they help patients and do they free up consultants' time?

Gradwell, C; Kim, Thomas; English, John; Williams, Hywel C

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04901.x

Cited by 70 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The remaining 67 articles satisfied our criteria [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73]. Sixteen concerned atopic dermatitis [7, 13, 14, 18,20,21,22, 26, 29, 31, 42, 46, 56, 66, 67, 70], 1 chronic eczema of the hands [9], 25 psoriasis [10, 17, 27, 30, 33,35,36,37,38,39,...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…QOL was a primary judgment criterion in 8 studies [8, 15, 16, 22, 24, 25, 50, 64]. QOL was a secondary endpoint in 88% (59/67) of the analyzed reports.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-five percent (17/67) of the reports addressed the problem of missing data in the methods [8, 12,21,22,23, 25, 29, 30, 33, 40, 49, 51, 57, 58, 64, 67, 72]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the number of dimensions and their contents, such as the number of items per dimension, and the minimal and maximal scores [9, 15, 20, 33, 39, 40, 43, 44, 51, 57, 58, 65, 69]. Only the name of the questionnaire was given in 16 others [12, 18, 19, 21, 25, 31, 32, 38, 45, 46, 53, 54, 61, 64, 66, 71]. In the remaining articles, this information was partially reported.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Poor Reporting of Quality of Life Outcomes in Dermatology Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Because many dermatological diseases are chronic but not life-threatening, consideration of their impact on health-related quality of life (QOL) seems essential. Objective: To analyze the use of QOL as an evaluation endpoint in randomized clinical trials concerning skin diseases. Methods: Studies identified by computerized search of 3 bibliographical databases were selected, and their data on QOL as an evaluation endpoint were collected and analyzed. Results: Among the 67 studies retained, 87% did not adequately describe the questionnaires; 75% did not address handling of missing data; 95% did not calculate the number of subjects needed to obtain the desired statistical power; 95% did not disclose before-and-after results as means of overall scores and each dimension. Conclusion: Our analysis highlighted methodological weaknesses in the use of QOL questionnaire and poor reporting of QOL outcomes in randomized clinical trials.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…QOL was a primary judgment criterion in 8 studies [8, 15, 16, 22, 24, 25, 50, 64]. QOL was a secondary endpoint in 88% (59/67) of the analyzed reports.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-five percent (17/67) of the reports addressed the problem of missing data in the methods [8, 12,21,22,23, 25, 29, 30, 33, 40, 49, 51, 57, 58, 64, 67, 72]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Poor Reporting of Quality of Life Outcomes in Dermatology Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the training was offered as often as needed over a period of 4 months, no significant improvement in the intervention group (n=46), compared with the control group (n=54), was achieved. In this context, data from Gradwell et al are worth noting, since they assessed the effects of providing a nurse follow-up clinic in addition to routine care by a dermatology outpatient department [27]. Because there was a significant increase in knowledge on how to apply the treatment and how to obtain disease-specific care, the authors finally stated that support from dermatology nurses can indeed be beneficial.…”

Section: Educational Training Programs For Adult Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapeutic Patient Education

Heratizadeh

2014

Curr Treat Options Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opinion statementPatient education in atopic dermatitis (AD) represents an essential therapeutic tool, which should be offered in addition to routine care, since previous studies have revealed that AD outpatients are often insufficiently treated and show severe limitations of quality of life. Considering the multifactorial pathogenesis of this chronic skin disease, the success of therapeutic patient education seems to depend on the involvement of a multidisciplinary team of professionals. The training program should include aspects on dermatology and allergy, but also on diet and nursing, as well as on disease-specific psychological issues. Synergistic beneficial effects upon interaction between affected patients or parents should be considered by performing the training in small groups. The overall aim of therapeutic patient education in AD should be an improvement of selfmanagement strategies to finally achieve a decrease in disease severity and an increase in quality of life. For children (and their parents) and adolescents with AD, successful programs have already been developed. However, in many countries, there is still a need for official recommendations in order to regulate reimbursement for the costs of such programs. Since the preliminary results from pilot studies in adults have been promising, further large controlled trials on patient education in this age group are needed to finally improve outpatient care also in adulthood AD.

show abstract

The Person-Centered Dermatology Self-Care Index

Cowdell¹,

Ersser²,

Gradwell³

et al. 2012

Arch Dermatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design:To date, no validated assessment measures exist to identify the education and support needs of patients living with long-term dermatological conditions and to enable them to self-manage as effectively as possible. The PeDeSI assessment tool was developed to meet this need using the self-efficacy construct and a model of concordance within prescribing practice. In total, 200 copies of the PeDeSI were distributed for validation, and 145 (72.5%) were returned completed. Data were analyzed using statistical software. Frequency distributions of all items were examined, and internal consistency was summarized using Cronbach ␣. Exploratory factor analysis was used to disclose any underlying structure among the data items.Setting: Three specialist dermatology centers in acute care hospitals.Participants: Dermatology specialist nurses treating patients with chronic dermatoses.Intervention: A PeDeSI was completed with each patient during his or her usual outpatient consultation.Main Outcome Measure: Cronbach ␣.Results: Cronbach ␣ was 0.90, indicating good internal consistency. Eliminating individual items in turn made little difference in Cronbach ␣ (range, 0.89-0.90). Item total correlations ranged from 0.44 to 0.76 (median, 0.68). Exploratory factor analysis extracted just one factor (eigenvalue, 5.37), with no other factors having eigenvalues exceeding 1.00. Factor loadings on individual items ranged from 0.47 to 0.80. Conclusion:The PeDeSI is a valid, reliable, and clinically practical tool to systematically assess the education and support needs of patients with long-term dermatological conditions and to promote treatment concordance.

show abstract

A randomized controlled trial of nurse follow-up clinics: do they help patients and do they free up consultants' time?

Cited by 70 publications

References 4 publications

Poor Reporting of Quality of Life Outcomes in Dermatology Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Poor Reporting of Quality of Life Outcomes in Dermatology Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Therapeutic Patient Education

The Person-Centered Dermatology Self-Care Index

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About