Randomised trial of personalised computer based information for cancer patients

Abstract

Objective To compare the use and effect of a computer based information system for cancer patients that is personalised using each patient's medical record with a system providing only general information and with information provided in booklets. Design Randomised trial with three groups. Data collected at start of radiotherapy, one week later (when information provided), three weeks later, and three months later. Participants 525 patients started radical radiotherapy; 438 completed follow up. Interventions Two groups were offered information via computer (personalised or general information, or both) with open access to computer thereafter; the third group was offered a selection of information booklets. Outcomes Patients' views and preferences, use of computer and information, and psychological status; doctors' perceptions; cost of interventions. Results More patients offered the personalised information said that they had learnt something new, thought the information was relevant, used the computer again, and showed their computer printouts to others. There were no major differences in doctors' perceptions of patients. More of the general computer group were anxious at three months. With an electronic patient record system, in the long run the personalised information system would cost no more than the general system. Full access to booklets cost twice as much as the general system. Conclusions Patients preferred computer systems that provided information from their medical records to systems that just provided general information. This has implications for the design and implementation of electronic patient record systems and reliance on general sources of patient information.

Does writing a list help cancer patients ask relevant questions?

“…Five hundred and twenty-five patients undergoing radical radiotherapy treatment for breast, cervical, prostate or laryngeal cancer were recruited to a randomised trial of computer based information [2]. Data collected at recruitment included demographic details, newspaper read, and the hospital anxiety and depression scale [7].…”

“…Deprivation scores were identified using postcode of residence [8]. After the randomised intervention [2], all patients were given a sheet of paper with the simple prompt to write questions and give to the doctor at their 3-week appointment. This also reminded doctors to complete a questionnaire about the patient.…”

“…Some have difficulty asking doctors direct questions [1]. Improving patient information is a recognised goal which can be addressed by providing new sources of information, such as touch screen computers [2], videos, or tapes of consultations [3], or by continuing clinical education. The use of checklists [4] and written lists [5,6] has been tried to give patients an opportunity to have their questions answered, although not all doctors like the idea [6].…”

A randomized trial comparing the effectiveness and preference of a touch‐screen computer system with a leaflet for providing women with information on urinary symptoms suggestive of detrusor instability

“…Apart from direct consultation, the most common methods are lea¯ets, posters, audiotapes and videotapes. More recently, the use of computers with touch screens was described [2,3]. We have developed such a system to provide information about the causes, investigation and treatment of urinary frequency, urgency or urge incontinence in women.…”

Consumer Health Informatics

“…On the internet it is possible to link personal In a randomised controlled trial, Jones and colleagues compared the effect of tailored information for cancer patients that was based on the contents of their medical records with general information provided electronically or in leaflets; the patients preferred the tailored information. 24 Tailored information has also been effective in a number of other areas, including instigating changes in health behaviour or in increasing knowledge. 25 In the United States, several projects are under way to evaluate the use of internet based health records that are accessible to patients.…”