The effects of Internet or interactive computer-based patient education in the field of breast cancer: a systematic literature review.
ABSTRACT The aim of this systematic review was to analyze what kind of Internet or interactive computer-based patient education programs have been developed and to analyze the effectiveness of these programs in the field of breast cancer patient education. Patient education for breast cancer patients is an important intervention to empower the patient. However, we know very little about the effects and potential of Internet-based patient education in the empowerment of breast cancer patients.
Complete databases were searched covering the period from the beginning of each database to November 2008. Studies were included if they concerned patient education for breast cancer patients with Internet or interactive computer programs and were based on randomized controlled, on clinical trials or quasi-experimental studies.
We identified 14 articles involving 2374 participants. The design was randomized controlled trial in nine papers, in two papers clinical trial and in three quasi-experimental. Seven of the studies were randomized to experimental and control groups, in two papers participants were grouped by ethnic and racial differences and by mode of Internet use and three studies measured the same group pre- and post-tests after using a computer program. The interventions used were described as interactive computer or multimedia programs and use of the Internet. The methodological solutions of the studies varied. The effects of the studies were diverse except for knowledge-related issues. Internet or interactive computer-based patient education programs in the care of breast cancer patients may have positive effect increasing breast cancer knowledge.
The results suggest a positive relationship between the Internet or computer-based patient education program use and the knowledge level of patients with breast cancer but a diverse relationship between patient's participation and other outcome measures.
There is need to develop and research more Internet-based patient education.
- SourceAvailable from: Benjamin Olney Anderson[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Breast cancer patients may have unmet supportive care needs during treatment, including symptom management of treatment-related toxicities, and educational, psychosocial, and spiritual needs. Delivery of supportive care is often a low priority in low- and middle-income settings, and is also dependent on resources available. This consensus statement describes twelve key recommendations for supportive care during treatment in low- and middle-income countries, identified by an expert international panel as part of the 5th Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) Global Summit for Supportive Care, which was held in October 2012, in Vienna, Austria. Panel recommendations are presented in a 4-tier resource-stratified table to illustrate how health systems can provide supportive care services during treatment to breast cancer patients, starting at a basic level of resource allocation and incrementally adding program resources as they become available. These recommendations include: health professional and patient and family education; management of treatment related toxicities, management of treatment-related symptoms of fatigue, insomnia and non-specific pain, and management of psychosocial and spiritual issues related to breast cancer treatment. Establishing supportive care during breast cancer treatment will help ensure that breast cancer patients receive comprehensive care that can help 1) improve adherence to treatment recommendations, 2) manage treatment-related toxicities and other treatment related symptoms, and 3) address the psychosocial and spiritual aspects of breast cancer and breast cancer treatments.The Breast 10/2013; 22(5):593–605. · 2.58 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background There is growing recognition of the importance of the active involvement of consumers and community members in health care. Despite the long history of consumer and community engagement (CCE) research and practice, there is no consensus on the best strategies for CCE. In this paper, we identify various dimensions of CCE-related strategies and offer a practical model to assist policy-makers, practitioners and researchers. Methods We undertook a large-scale, scoping meta-review and searched six databases using a list of nine medical subject headings (MeSH) and a comprehensive list of 47 phrases. We identified and examined a total of 90 relevant systematic reviews. Results Identified reviews show that although there is a significant body of research on CCE, the development of the field is hindered by a lack of evidence relating to specific elements of CCE. They also indicate a diverse and growing enterprise, drawing on a wide range of disciplinary, political and philosophical perspectives and a mix of definitions, targets, approaches, strategies and mechanisms. CCE interventions and strategies aim to involve consumers, community members and the public in general, as well as specific sub-groups, including children and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Strategies for CCE vary in terms of their aim and type of proposed activity, as do the methods and tools which have been developed to support them. Methods and tools include shared decision making, use of decision aids, consumer representation, application of electronic and internet-based facilities, and peer support. The success of CCE is dependent on both the approach taken and contextual factors, including structural facilitators such as governmental support, as well as barriers such as costs, organisational culture and population-specific limitations. Conclusions The diversity of the field indicates the need to measure each component of CCE. This meta-review provides the basis for development of a new eight stage model of consumer and community engagement. This model emphasises the importance of clarity and focus, as well as an extensive evaluation of contextual factors within specific settings, before the implementation of CCE strategies, enabling those involved in CCE to determine potential facilitators and barriers to the process.BMC Health Services Research 09/2014; 14:402. · 1.66 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: eHealth potentially enhances quality of care and may reduce health care costs. However, a review of systematic reviews published in 2010 concluded that high-quality evidence on the benefits of eHealth interventions was still lacking. We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effectiveness/cost-effectiveness of eHealth interventions in patients with somatic diseases to analyze whether, and to what possible extent, the outcome of recent research supports or differs from previous conclusions. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on eHealth interventions published between August 2009 and December 2012. Articles were screened for relevance based on preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. Citations of residual articles were screened for additional literature. Included papers were critically appraised using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement before data were extracted. Based on conclusions drawn by the authors of the included articles, reviews and meta-analyses were divided into 1 of 3 groups: suitable, promising, or limited evidence on effectiveness/cost-effectiveness. Cases of uncertainty were resolved by consensus discussion. Effect sizes were extracted from papers that included a meta-analysis. To compare our results with previous findings, a trend analysis was performed. Our literature searches yielded 31 eligible reviews, of which 20 (65%) reported on costs. Seven papers (23%) concluded that eHealth is effective/cost-effective, 13 (42%) underlined that evidence is promising, and others found limited or inconsistent proof. Methodological quality of the included reviews and meta-analyses was generally considered high. Trend analysis showed a considerable accumulation of literature on eHealth. However, a similar percentage of papers concluded that eHealth is effective/cost-effective or evidence is at least promising (65% vs 62%). Reviews focusing primarily on children or family caregivers still remained scarce. Although a pooled (subgroup) analysis of aggregate data from randomized studies was performed in a higher percentage of more recently published reviews (45% vs 27%), data on economic outcome measures were less frequently reported (65% vs 85%). The number of reviews and meta-analyses on eHealth interventions in patients with somatic diseases has increased considerably in recent years. Most articles show eHealth is effective/cost-effective or at least suggest evidence is promising, which is consistent with previous findings. Although many researchers advocate larger, well-designed, controlled studies, we believe attention should be given to the development and evaluation of strategies to implement effective/cost-effective eHealth initiatives in daily practice, rather than to further strengthen current evidence.Journal of Medical Internet Research 01/2014; 16(4):e110. · 4.67 Impact Factor