Dataset Information

Information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals: a mixed method study.

ABSTRACT: Background Providing appropriate medication information to patients is of utmost importance for optimal pharmacotherapy. (Un)intentional miscommunication and information gaps resulting in unmet needs could negatively affect patient's ability to use their medication properly. Objective To identify the information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals in the Netherlands. Setting Cardiology, oncology, or rheumatology department of five hospitals. Methods Adult cardiology, oncology, and rheumatology patients participated in this mixed-method study. Focus groups and individual interviews were held to identify patients' views on the medication information and their information needs. Outcomes were used to construct a questionnaire that was used in a survey among patients to compare existing medication information with patients' needs, and to judge the quality of the provided information. Main outcome measure Patients needs with medication information. Results Four themes derived from interviews with 44 patients: (1) Content; almost all patients acknowledged to receive insufficient information not meeting their personal needs. (2) Moment of delivery; patients were dissatisfied with the timing. (3) Method of delivery; patients highly preferred verbal and written information. (4) Contextual quality prerequisites that should be met according to patients; medication information should be accessible, comprehensive, reliable and understandable. A total of 352 patients completed the questionnaire. Almost all patients reported all items as important, whereas up to 74.6% patients were not informed. Up to half of the patients perceived verbal information from healthcare providers, written information of leaflets and folders of insufficient quality. Conclusion Patients attending Dutch hospitals have needs for extensive medication information, which should be tailored to their individual needs. According to patients the quality of medication information available in hospitals can be improved.

SUBMITTER: Bekker CL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7603457 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals: a mixed method study.

Bekker Charlotte L CL Mohsenian Naghani Shaghayegh S Natsch Stephanie S Wartenberg Naomi S NS van den Bemt Bart J F BJF

International journal of clinical pharmacy 20200828 6

Background Providing appropriate medication information to patients is of utmost importance for optimal pharmacotherapy. (Un)intentional miscommunication and information gaps resulting in unmet needs could negatively affect patient's ability to use their medication properly. Objective To identify the information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals in the Netherlands. Setting Cardiology, oncology, or rheumatology department of five hospita ...[more]

PMID: 32857256

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough medication reconciliation (MedRec) is mandated and effective in decreasing preventable medication errors during transition of care, hospitals implement MedRec differently.ObjectiveQuantitatively compare the number and type of MedRec interventions between hospitals upon admission and discharge, followed by a qualitative analysis on potential reasons for differences.MethodsThis explanatory retrospective mixed-method study consisted of a quantitative and a qualitative part. Patients from six hospitals and six different wards i.e. orthopaedics, surgery, pulmonary diseases, internal medicine, cardiology and gastroenterology were included. At these wards, MedRec was implemented both on hospital admission and discharge. The number of pharmacy interventions was collected and classified in two subcategories. First, the number of interventions to resolve unintended discrepancies (elimination of differences between listed medication and the patient's actual medication use). And second, the number of medication optimizations (optimization of pharmacotherapy e.g. eliminating double medication). Based on these quantitative results and interviews, a focus group was performed to give insight in local MedRec processes to address differences in context between hospitals. Descriptive analysis (quantitative) and content analysis (qualitative) was used.ResultsOn admission 765 (85%) patients from six hospitals, received MedRec by trained nurses, pharmacy technicians, pharmaceutical consultants or pharmacists. Of those, 36-95% (mean per patient 2.2 (SD ± 2.4)) had at least one discrepancy. Upon discharge, these numbers were among 632 (70%) of patients, 5-28% (mean per patient 0.7 (SD 1.2)). Optimizations in pharmacotherapy were implemented for 2% (0.4-3.7 interventions per patient upon admission) to 95% (0.1-1.7 interventions per patient upon discharge) of patients. The main themes explaining differences in numbers of interventions were patient-mix, the type of healthcare professionals involved, where and when patient interviews for MedRec were performed and finally, embedding and extent of medication optimization.ConclusionsHospitals differed greatly in the number of interventions performed during MedRec. Differences in execution of MedRec and local context determines the number of interventions. This study can support hospitals who want to optimize MedRec processes.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether the use of computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and electronic medication administration records (eMAR) is associated with better quality of medication administration at medium-to-large acute-care hospitals. DATA/STUDY SETTING: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of data from three sources: CPOE/eMAR usage from HIMSS Analytics (2010), medication quality scores from CMS Hospital Compare (2010), and hospital characteristics from CMS Acute Inpatient Prospective Payment System (2009). The analysis focused on 11 quality indicators (January-December 2009) at 2603 medium-to-large (≥ 100 beds), non-federal acute-care hospitals measuring proportion of eligible patients given (or prescribed) recommended medications for conditions, including acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia, and surgical care improvement. Using technology adoption by 2008 as reference, hospitals were coded: (1) eMAR-only adopters (n=986); (2) CPOE-only adopters (n=115); and (3) adopters of both technologies (n=804); with non-adopters of both technologies as reference group (n=698). Hospitals were also coded for duration of use in 2-year increments since technology adoption. Hospital characteristics, historical measure-specific patient volume, and propensity scores for technology adoption were used to control for confounding factors. The analysis was performed using a generalized linear model (logit link and binomial family).Principal findingsRelative to non-adopters of both eMAR and CPOE, the odds of adherence to all measures (except one) were higher by 14-29% for eMAR-only hospitals and by 13-38% for hospitals with both technologies, translating to a marginal increase of 0.4-2.0 percentage points. Further, each additional 2 years of technology use was associated with 6-15% higher odds of compliance on all medication measures for eMAR-only hospitals and users of both technologies.ConclusionsImplementation and duration of use of health information technologies are associated with improved adherence to medication guidelines at US hospitals. The benefits are evident for adoption of eMAR systems alone and in combination with CPOE.

Project description:BackgroundRecognized disparities in quality of end-of-life care exist. Our aim was to assess the quality of care for patients dying from cancer, as perceived by bereaved relatives, within hospitals in seven European and South American countries.Materials and methodsA postbereavement survey was conducted by post, interview, or via tablet in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, U.K., Germany, Norway, and Poland. Next of kin to cancer patients were asked to complete the international version of the Care Of the Dying Evaluation (i-CODE) questionnaire 6-8 weeks postbereavement. Primary outcomes were (a) how frequently the deceased patient was treated with dignity and respect, and (b) how well the family member was supported in the patient's last days of life.ResultsOf 1,683 potential participants, 914 i-CODE questionnaires were completed (response rate, 54%). Approximately 94% reported the doctors treated their family member with dignity and respect "always" or "most of the time"; similar responses were given about nursing staff (94%). Additionally, 89% of participants reported they were adequately supported; this was more likely if the patient died on a specialist palliative care unit (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-17.8). Although 87% of participants were told their relative was likely to die, only 63% were informed about what to expect during the dying phase.ConclusionThis is the first study assessing quality of care for dying cancer patients from the bereaved relatives' perspective across several countries on two continents. Our findings suggest many elements of good care were practiced but improvement in communication with relatives of imminently dying patients is needed. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03566732).Implications for practicePrevious studies have shown that bereaved relatives' views represent a valid way to assess care for dying patients in the last days of their life. The Care Of the Dying Evaluation questionnaire is a suitable tool for quality improvement work to help determine areas where care is perceived well and areas where care is perceived as lacking. Health care professionals need to sustain high quality communication into the last phase of the cancer trajectory. In particular, discussions about what to expect when someone is dying and the provision of hydration in the last days of life represent key areas for improvement.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-tests are available to consumers for more than 25 conditions, ranging from infectious diseases to cardiovascular risk factors. Self-tests are defined as in-vitro tests on body materials such as blood, urine, faeces, or saliva that are initiated by consumers to diagnose a particular disorder or risk factor without involving a medical professional. In 2006, 16% of a sample of Dutch Internet users had ever used at least one self-test and 17% intended to use a self-test in the future. The objectives of this study are to determine (1) the frequency of self-test use, (2) the consumers' reasons for using or not using a self-test, (3) the information that is used by self-testers in the different self-test stages and the consumers' interpretation of the quality of this information, (4) the consumers' response to self-test results in terms of their confidence in the result, reassurance by the test result, and follow-up behaviour, (5) the information consumers report to need in the decision making process of using or not using a self-test, and in further management on the basis of the self-test result, and (6) the quality of the currently available consumer information on a selected set of self-tests.MethodsMixed methods study with (1) a cross-sectional study consisting of a two-phase Internet-questionnaire, (2) semi-structured interviews with self-testers and consumers who intend to use a self-test, and (3) the assessment of the quality of consumer information of self-tests. The Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour will serve as the theoretical basis for the questionnaires and the interview topic guides.ConclusionsThe self-testing area is still in a state of flux and therefore it is expected that self-test use will increase in the future. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study which combines quantitative and qualitative research to identify consumers' information needs and use concerning self-testing, and the consumers' actual follow-up behaviour based on the self-test result, and simultaneously investigates the quality of the currently available consumer information. The results of this study will be used as an input in developing consumer information on self-testing.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Current medical professions involve an extensive knowledge of the latest validated scientific data to implement disease diagnosis, therapeutic strategies, and patient care. Although clinicians can refer to a growing number and type of information sources to keep current with new scientific achievements, there are still various concerns about medical information validity, quality, and applicability into clinical practice. Novel strategies are required to identify physicians' real-life needs with the final aim to improve modern medical information delivery. OBJECTIVE:Our research used an innovative tool to collect real-time physician queries in order to investigate information needs and seeking behavior of Italian neurologists treating patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and migraine. METHODS:The study was designed as an exploratory mixed methods (ie, qualitative and quantitative) study involving 15 consecutive days of observation. A total of 50 neurologists (n=25 MS and n=25 migraine specialists) were recruited. Data were collected using an instant messaging mobile app designed for this research. At each information-seeking event, moderators triggered a computer-assisted personal interview including both semistructured interview and close-ended questions. Interactions and physician queries collected using the mobile app were coded into emerging themes by content analysis. RESULTS:Neurologist queries were relevant to the following major themes: therapy management (36/50, 71%) and drug-related information (34/50, 67%), followed by diagnostic strategies and procedures (21/50, 42%). Quantitative analysis indicated online resources were preferentially used by clinicians (48/50, 96%) compared with offline sources (24/50, 47%). A multichannel approach, in which both online and offline sources were consulted to meet the same need, was adopted in 33% (65/198) of information-seeking events. Neurologists more likely retrieved information from online relative to offline channels (F=1.7; P=.01). MS specialists were 53% more likely to engage in one information-seeking event compared with migraine neurologists (risk ratio 1.54; 95% CI 1.16-2.05). MS specialists tended to be more interested in patient-related content than migraine clinicians (28% [7/25] vs 10% [2/25], P=.06), who conversely more likely sought information concerning therapy management (85% [21/25] vs 60% [15/25], P=.05). Compared with MS clinicians, migraine specialists had a harder time finding the required information, either looking at online or offline channels (F=12.5; P=.01) and less frequently used offline channels (30% [8/25] vs 60% [15/25] of information-seeking events, P=.02). When multiple sources needed to be consulted to retrieve an information item, a reduced satisfaction rate was observed both among migraine and MS specialists (single source vs multiple sources P=.003). CONCLUSIONS:This study provides a detailed description of real-life seeking behavior, educational needs, and information sources adopted by Italian MS and migraine neurologists. Neurologist information needs and seeking behavior reflect the specific characteristics of the specialty area in which they operate. These findings suggest identification of time- and context-specific needs of clinicians is required to design an effective medical information strategy.

Project description:ImportanceSince 2014, medical industry payment data to physicians have been public via the Open Payments database. Patient opinions regarding these data help us to understand concerns and policymakers to improve reporting mechanisms for such payments.ObjectiveTo assess patient perceptions of Open Payments information.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted in 3 ophthalmology clinic sites of an academic institution in Manhattan, New York City, New York. All patients older than 18 years who were waiting for appointments were eligible. Data were collected from January to June 2016 and analyzed from June to September 2016.ExposuresParticipants answered 27 questions about the Open Payments database in English or Spanish. Demographic information was also collected.Main outcomes and measuresKey questionnaire results included patient awareness of the Open Payments database and perceptions of physicians' financial relationships. Cronbach α validation of the survey was performed, and Poisson multivariable regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between patient characteristics and responses.ResultsA total of 407 individuals participated. The mean (SD) age of study participants was 58.8 (17.9) years, and 220 (54.2%) were women. Of these, 30 (7.3% [95% CI, 5.1%-19.4%]) were aware of the Open Payments database, and 109 (26.8% [95% CI, 24.8%-34.0%]) planned to access it. More than half (n = 212; 53.5% [95% CI, 48.6%-58.5%]) wanted to know if their physician receives industry payments. Regarding payments of any kind valuing $100, 161 (41.9% [95% CI, 37.0%-46.9%]) disapproved. Similarly, 178 (45.8% [95% CI, 40.8%-50.7%]) disapproved of $500 payments, and 221 (57.0% [95% CI, 52.0%-61.9%]) disapproved of $25 000 payments. Poisson multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that participants who took the survey in Spanish were 38% more likely to approve of physicians receiving payments than were those who took the survey in English (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.38 [95% CI, 1.19-1.59]; P < .001). For every 1 year of age, the likelihood of approval for a physician receiving payments decreased by 1% (IRR, 0.995 [95% CI, 0.99-1.00]; P = .007). Participants with graduate degrees were 20% less likely to approve of physicians receiving payments, compared with those with less than a high school degree (IRR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66-0.97]; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceIf the survey is validated, and if these results are generalizable outside of the 3 academic centers in ophthalmology surveyed, the findings suggest that many patients disapprove of physicians receiving payments from industry. However, few patients had accessed the Open Payments database or planned to access it. Further investigation is required to determine if these results can be generalized for other settings.

Project description:Background & aimsIn an attempt to uncover unmet patient needs, this review aims to synthesise quantitative and qualitative studies on patients' quality of life and their experience of having liver disease.MethodsThree databases (CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed) were searched from January 2000 to October 2020. The methodological quality and data extraction of both quantitative and qualitative studies were screened and appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute instruments for mixed-method systematic reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A convergent, integrated approach to synthesis and integration was used. Studies including patients with autoimmune and cholestatic liver disease, chronic hepatitis B and C, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma were considered.ResultsThe searches produced 5,601 articles, of which 95 (79 quantitative and 16 qualitative) were included in the review. These represented studies from 26 countries and a sample of 37,283 patients. The studies showed that patients´ quality of life was reduced. Unmet needs for information and support and perceived stigmatisation severely affected patients' quality of life.ConclusionsOur study suggests changes to improve quality of life. According to patients, this could be achieved by providing better education and information, being aware of patients' need for support, and raising awareness of liver disease among the general population to reduce misconceptions and stigmatisation.Registration numberPROSPERO CRD42020173501.Lay summaryRegardless of aetiology, patients with liver diseases have impaired quality of life. This is associated with disease progression, the presence of symptoms, treatment response, and mental, physical, and social factors such as anxiety, confusion, comorbidities, and fatigue, as well as limitations in daily living, including loneliness, low income, stigmatisation, and treatment costs. Patients highlighted the need for information to understand and manage liver disease, and awareness and support from healthcare professionals to better cope with the disease. In addition, there is a need to raise awareness of liver diseases in the general population to reduce negative preconceptions and stigmatisation.

Dataset Information

Information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals: a mixed method study.

Publications

Information needs and patient perceptions of the quality of medication information available in hospitals: a mixed method study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets