Using information prescriptions to refer patients with metabolic conditions to the Genetics Home Reference website.

Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA (Impact Factor: 0.99). 01/2011; 99(1):70-6. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.99.1.012
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objectives of this study were to assess the reactions of adult patients and parents of children with metabolic conditions to receipt of an "information prescription" (IP) to visit Genetics Home Reference (GHR), a National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine online resource, and evaluate the perceived utility of information found on the site.
Patients seen at the University of Utah Metabolic Service Clinic were invited to participate in the study and asked to complete an initial survey to gather demographic data and an online survey six weeks later to obtain information about user experience.
Fifty-three of 82 individuals completed both surveys, for an overall response rate of 64.6%. Most respondents (88.7%) agreed that receiving the IP was a "good idea," and nearly all used the IP to visit GHR. More than three-quarters (79.6%) agreed that information on GHR supplemented a physician's advice; 60.4% reported an improved understanding of a health condition; and 41.5% either looked for or would consider looking for additional information. Eighty-six percent of respondents were satisfied with the information found on GHR, and 80% would recommend the site.
Use of an IP to direct patients to GHR was well received, and retrieved information was perceived as useful in key areas. The high level of satisfaction with GHR argues for expanded use of the IP approach in this patient population.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recently, government agencies in several countries have promoted information prescription programs to increase patients' understanding of their conditions. The practice has a long history and many publications, but no comprehensive literature reviews such as this.
    Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA 10/2014; 102(4):271-80. · 0.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The internet can provide evidence-based patient education to overcome time constraints of busy ambulatory practices. Health information prescriptions (HIPs) can be effectively integrated into clinic workflow, but compliance to visit health information sites such as MedlinePlus is limited. OBJECTIVE: Compare the efficacy of paper (pHIP) and email (eHIP) links to deliver HIPs; evaluate patient satisfaction with the HIP process and MedlinePlus information; assess reasons for noncompliance to HIPs. METHOD: Of 948 patients approached at two internal medicine clinics affiliated with an academic medical centre, 592 gave informed consent after meeting the inclusion criteria. In this randomised controlled trial, subjects were randomised to receive pHIP or eHIP for accessing an intermediate website that provided up to five MedlinePlus links for physician-selected HIP conditions. Patients accessing the intermediate website were surveyed by email to assess satisfaction with the health information. Survey non-responders were contacted by telephone to determine the reasons for no response. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-one patients accessed the website, with significantly more 'filling' eHIP than pHIP (38% vs 23%; P < 0.001). Most (82%) survey respondents found the website information useful, with 77% favouring email for future HIPs delivery. Lack of time, forgot, lost instructions or changed mind were reasons given for not accessing the websites. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of MedlinePlus-based HIPs in clinic is more effective using email prescriptions than paper. Satisfaction with the HIP information was high, but overall response was low and deserves further investigation to improve compliance and related outcomes.
    Informatics in primary care 11/2013; 20(3):197-205.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many speak of the digital divide, but variation in the opportunity of patients to use the Internet for health (patient eHealth readiness) is not a binary difference, rather a distribution influenced by personal capability, provision of services, support, and cost. Digital divisions in health have been addressed by various initiatives, but there was no comprehensive validated measure to know if they are effective that could be used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) covering both non-Internet-users and the range of Internet-users.
    Medicine 2.0. 07/2013; 2(2):e9.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 22, 2014