Evaluation of a hospital-based cancer information and support centre

Kinnane, Nicole

doi:10.1007/s00520-010-1071-y

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, consumers may travel for specialty care that is inaccessible locally, shopping for a facility and turning to the Internet for information [31,32]. Another explanation for large organizations’ success is that the complex and high-risk nature of cancer and childhood illnesses makes selecting an organization with high-quality ratings and a reputation for innovation particularly important [33,34]. This may contribute to the impetus for specialty facilities to develop high-performing websites for their marketing purposes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospital Website Rankings in the United States: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Consumer Engagement

Huerta¹,

Hefner²,

Ford³

et al. 2014

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPassage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased the roles hospitals and health systems play in care delivery and led to a wave of consolidation of medical groups and hospitals. As such, the traditional patient interaction with an independent medical provider is becoming far less common, replaced by frequent interactions with integrated medical groups and health systems. It is thus increasingly important for these organizations to have an effective social media presence. Moreover, in the age of the informed consumer, patients desire a readily accessible, electronic interface to initiate contact, making a well-designed website and social media strategy critical features of the modern health care organization.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the Web presence of hospitals and their health systems on five dimensions: accessibility, content, marketing, technology, and usability. In addition, an overall ranking was calculated to identify the top 100 hospital and health system websites.MethodsA total of 2407 unique Web domains covering 2785 hospital facilities or their parent organizations were identified and matched against the 2009 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey. This is a four-fold improvement in prior research and represents what the authors believe to be a census assessment of the online presence of US hospitals and their health systems. Each of the five dimensions was investigated with an automated content analysis using a suite of tools. Scores on the dimensions are reported on a range from 0 to 10, with a higher score on any given dimension representing better comparative performance. Rankings on each dimension and an average ranking are provided for the top 100 hospitals.ResultsThe mean score on the usability dimension, meant to rate overall website quality, was 5.16 (SD 1.43), with the highest score of 8 shared by only 5 hospitals. Mean scores on other dimensions were between 4.43 (SD 2.19) and 6.49 (SD 0.96). Based on these scores, rank order calculations for the top 100 websites are presented. Additionally, a link to raw data, including AHA ID, is provided to enable researchers and practitioners the ability to further explore relationships to other dynamics in health care.ConclusionsThis census assessment of US hospitals and their health systems provides a clear indication of the state of the sector. While stakeholder engagement is core to most discussions of the role that hospitals must play in relation to communities, management of an online presence has not been recognized as a core competency fundamental to care delivery. Yet, social media management and network engagement are skills that exist at the confluence of marketing and technical prowess. This paper presents performance guidelines evaluated against best-demonstrated practice or independent standards to facilitate improvement of the sector’s use of websites and social media.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospital Website Rankings in the United States: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Consumer Engagement

Huerta¹,

Hefner²,

Ford³

et al. 2014

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The provision of information to people with cancer across their treatment journey has well established benefits including enhanced coping and improved self-care (Kinnane 2012). Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly utilised for identification of needs and relevant supports in cancer care but it is not until a clinical problem is adequately identified and described that it can start to be monitored and managed.…”

Section: Translating What Is Known Into Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Chemosensory Science in the Context of Cancer Treatment: Implications for Patient Care

Boltong

Keast

2015

Chem. Percept.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This collaborative commentary brings together both clinical and sensory science perspectives in an effort to explain the mechanisms of cancer treatment and the ensuing implications for the sensorium. Strategy This paper makes the distinction between food hedonics and true chemosensory effects in the cancer context and describes the adverse effects cancer and its treatment have on the eating and drinking experience, including gastronomic, nutritional and emotional implications. Results from a prospective breast cancer cohort study, conducted by an interdisciplinary team of nurses, medical oncologists, dietitians and sensory science researchers shed new light on specific sensory symptomatology associated with chemotherapy treatment and the implications this has for informing reliable pre-treatment patient education. Findings Two conceptual models are posed as frameworks for better understanding the determinants and consequences of altered eating and drinking experiences during chemotherapy, as well as the link between patient-reported symptoms and chemosensory or hedonic disturbances. Discussion Application of evidence of cancer treatment and its sensory effects in the patient treatment context continues to be a challenge for cancer clinicians, especially where standardised testing of taste and smell function are not able to be practically administered. Conclusions Recommendations are made for further research and practice pursuits to underpin improved food enjoyment and dietary quality throughout the cancer trajectory. Clinician education of sensory science is also encouraged.

show abstract

“…Common barriers resulting from health service organization or physical structure included: waitlists and appointments delays [32, 33]; poor service availability [33, 52, 55, 58, 63]; difficulties with parking [33, 36, 37, 60, 65, 77, 79]; poor transport options [33, 36, 61, 69]; distance to the outpatient clinic [33, 54, 67]; inability to meet medical fees [32, 47, 49, 61] or prescription costs [32, 49, 83]; inadequate health insurance coverage [19, 39, 47, 55, 75, 83, 87, 98]; and poor service amenities [33, 37, 46, 60, 65, 71, 77, 79, 89]. …”

Section: Results Of Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of barriers to optimal outpatient specialist services for individuals with prevalent chronic diseases: what are the unique and common barriers experienced by patients in high income countries?

Fradgley

Paul

Bryant

2015

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health utilization and need assessment data suggest there is considerable variation in access to outpatient specialist care. However, it is unclear if the types of barriers experienced are specific to chronic disease groups or experienced universally. This systematic review provides a detailed summary of common and unique barriers experienced by chronic disease groups when accessing and receiving care, and a synthesized list of possible health service initiatives to improve equitable delivery of optimal care in high-income countries. Quantitative articles describing barriers to specialist outpatient services were retrieved from CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PyscINFO. To be eligible for review, studies: were published from 2002 to May 2014; included samples with cancer, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, arthritis, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, asthma, chronic pulmonary disorder (COPD) or depression; and, were conducted in high-income countries. Using a previously validated model of access (Penchansky and Thomas’ model of fit), barriers were grouped according to five overarching domains and defined in more detail using 33 medical subject headings. Results from reviewed articles, including the scope and frequency of reported barriers, are conceptualized using thematic analysis and framed as possible health service initiatives. A total of 3181 unique records were screened for eligibility, of which 74 studies were included in final analysis. The largest proportion of studies reported acceptability barriers (75.7 %), of which demographic disparities (44.6 %) were reported across all diseases. Other frequently reported barriers included inadequate need assessment (25.7 %), information provision (32.4 %), or health communication (20 %). Unique barriers were identified for oncology, mental health, and COPD samples. Based on the scope, frequency and measurement of reported barriers, eight key themes with associated implications for health services are presented. Examples include: common accommodation and accessibility barriers caused on service organization or physical structure, such as parking and appointment scheduling; common barriers created by poor coordination of care within the healthcare team; and unique barriers resulting from inadequate need assessment and referral practices. Consideration of barriers, across and within chronic diseases, suggests a number of specific initiatives are likely to improve the delivery of patient-centered care and increase equity in access to high-quality health services.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-015-0179-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Evaluation of a hospital-based cancer information and support centre

Cited by 16 publications

References 42 publications

Hospital Website Rankings in the United States: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Consumer Engagement

Hospital Website Rankings in the United States: Expanding Benchmarks and Standards for Effective Consumer Engagement

Chemosensory Science in the Context of Cancer Treatment: Implications for Patient Care

A systematic review of barriers to optimal outpatient specialist services for individuals with prevalent chronic diseases: what are the unique and common barriers experienced by patients in high income countries?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About