A website to improve asthma care by suggesting patient questions for physicians: qualitative analysis of user experiences.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions in the United States, yet despite the existence of national guidelines, nearly three fourths of patients with asthma do not have adequate control and clinical adherence to guidelines is low. While there are many reasons for this, physician inertia with respect to treatment change is partly to blame. Research suggests that patients who ask for specific tests and treatments are more likely to receive them. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the impact and experience of using an interactive patient website designed to give patients individual feedback about their condition and to suggest tailored questions for patients to ask their physician. The website was designed to be used prior to a physician visit, to increase the likelihood that patients would receive recommended tests and treatments. METHODS: A total of 37 adult patients with asthma participated in semi-structured telephone interviews aimed at eliciting information about their experiences with the website. Transcripts were coded using qualitative data analysis techniques and software. Themes were developed from subsets of codes generated through the analysis. In addition, 26 physicians were surveyed regarding their impressions of the website. RESULTS: Opportunities exist for improving website feedback, although the majority of both patient and physician respondents held favorable opinions about the site. Two major themes emerged regarding patients' experiences with the website. First, many patients who used the website had a positive shift in their attitudes regarding interactions with their physicians. Second, use of the website prompted patients to become more actively involved in their asthma care. No patient reported any negative experiences as a result of using the website. Physicians rated the website positively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients perceived that the interactive website intervention improved communication and interaction with their physicians, suggesting that patients can play a role in overcoming the clinical inertia of providers. Although the design and content of the website can be improved upon, the main findings suggest that use of the website is well accepted and is perceived to improve the quality of care that patients receive.

Effects of a Website designed to improve the management of migraines.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine the effect of using a Web-based computer program that provides personalized feedback to migraine patients, on the interactions of patients and providers. Background.-Despite the widespread availability of evidence-based migraine treatment guidelines, patients often do not receive optimal treatment to reduce migraine pain and disability. METHODS: To address these quality gaps in migraine care, we developed a Web-based computer program, to be used by migraine patients before doctor visits. The feedback is designed to prompt patients to ask questions that lead to higher quality of care. This study was conducted to examine the effect of using the program on migraine-specific doctor-patient communications. Patients were randomized to use the Website before (intervention) or after (control) a visit with their provider. The outcome measures were the migraine-specific topics discussed during the visit, measured by an exit survey after the visit. RESULTS: Fifty of 53 subjects randomized completed the postvisit measures (94%). Overall, the mean age was 42.0 years, most patients were female (86.5%), all were white, and 58.5% saw a headache specialist during their visit. Most (75.0%) reported having headaches at least once per week and 48.1% rated their headaches as "severe." Intervention patients were significantly more likely to "discuss whether you had migraine headaches or some other type of headache?" (89.3% vs 54.5%; P < .01) and to "discuss whether or not there may be a more serious cause of your headaches?" (50.0% vs 13.6%; P < .01). Intervention patients were more likely to report discussing 8 of 12 migraine-related topics more frequently and a greater overall number of topics (5.5 vs 4.3) than control patients. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the Website may have a positive impact on migraine-specific doctor-patient communications. A larger study, including important quality of life and utilization outcomes, is warranted.

The effect of web-based, personalized, osteoarthritis quality improvement feedback on patient satisfaction with osteoarthritis care.

To address gaps in the quality of care for osteo-arthritis, the authors developed a Web-based computer program to provide patients with personalized feedback designed to improve the quality of their osteoarthritis care. The current study was designed to examine satisfaction as well as the potential effects of the feedback on patients' perceptions of their osteoarthritis care by randomizing patients to use the site before or after they answered questions about the quality of their osteoarthritis care. On average, participants received 8.7 recommendations to change their osteoarthritis care. Satisfaction with osteo-arthritis care was similar between subjects in both groups. Most subjects believed that the Web site would help them get better care from their doctor (77.7%), and most would recommend it to others (94.3%). Overall, the Web site is well accepted and has no negative effect on patients' satisfaction with their osteo-arthritis care.