BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Świeczkowski Damian (Medical University of Gdansk, Poland), Merks Piotr (Collegium Medicum, Bydgoszcz, Poland), Cwalina Natalia (Medical University of Gdansk, Poland), Jaguszewski Milosz (Medical University of Gdansk, Poland)
Tytuł
Patients' Opinions on Metoprolol, as Expressed on the Internet - an Exploratory, Qualitative Study
Źródło
Journal of Health Policy and Outcomes Research, 2017, nr 2, s. 46-53, rys., tab., bibliogr. 30 poz.
Słowa kluczowe
Badanie opinii, Prawa pacjenta, Zdrowie, Internet
Opinion research, Patient's rights, Health, Internet
Uwagi
summ.
Abstrakt
Background Use of the Internet in health communication provides an opportunity for more effective discussions, consequently Internet forums are potential sources of drug-related information for the patients. However, we must consider the possibility of misinformation that exists in the virtual environment. We explore patients' perceptions and attitudes towards metoprolol as stated on the Internet. We equated patients' opinions published on the Internet with written information available in Poland for patients and physicians. Methods This is an exploratory, qualitative study. Data was analyzed thematically. Themes were identified inductively from the data as described by experts in the field of qualitative studies. To obtain data from a variety of individuals, they were collected from three websites that were publicly available and patient-directed. Results Five themes were identified: weight gain, impact on sleep and mood, interactions between alcohol and drugs, using metoprolol during gestation, and a connection between sexual dysfunction and pharmacotherapy. Patients described their concerns as associated directly with the pharmacotherapy. Patients declared that their physician had no time to explain drug-related problems during the examination. In the Consumer Medicine Information (leaflets), all the information that could prove beneficial for solving a patient's confusion, misinterpretations and concerns, can be found. Conclusions Internet forums are not reliable sources of medicine-related information. Most opinions included in this study presented as poor quality and should be considered potentially risky for the patients and might be unsafe in the field of public health issues. Further study should be based on quantitative methods or triangulation concept.(original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Nutbeam D. Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promot Int. 2000;15(3):259-267. doi:10.1093/heapro/15.3.259.
  2. Rimal RN, Lapinski MK. Why health communication is important in public health. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87(4):247. doi:10.2471/BLT.08.056713.
  3. Stewart M. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: A review. Cmaj. 1995;152(9):1423-1433.
  4. Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(5):487-497. doi:10.1056/NEJMra050100.
  5. Koo M, Krass I, Aslani P. Enhancing patient education about medicines: Factors influencing reading and seeking of written medicine information. Heal Expect. 2006;9(2):174-187. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00381.x.
  6. Luk A, Tasker N, RaynorDKT, Aslani P. Written medicine information from English-speaking countries - How does it compare? Ann Pharmacother. 2010;44(2):285-294. doi:10.1345/aph.1M402.
  7. HamrosiKK, Aslani P, Raynor DK. Beyond needs and expectations: Identifying the barriers and facilitators to written medicine information provision and use in Australia. Heal Expect. 2014;17(2):220-231. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00753.x.
  8. Ratzan SC. Our new "social" communication age in health.J Health Commun. 2011;16(8):803-804. doi:10.1080/10810730.2011.610220.
  9. Weiner JP. Doctor-patient communication in the e-health era.Isr J Health Policy Res. 2012;1(1):33. doi:10.1186/2045-4015-1-33.
  10. Chou WS, Hunt YM, BeckjordEB, Moser RP, Hesse BW. Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11(4):e48. doi:10.2196/jmir.1249.
  11. Beck RS, Daughtridge R, Sloane PD. Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board FamPract. 2002;15(1):25-38.
  12. George DR, Rovniak LS, KraschnewskiJL. Dangers and opportunities for social media in medicine.ClinObstet Gynecol. 2013;56(3):453-462. doi:10.1097/GRF.0b013e318297dc38.
  13. Charakterystyka Produktu Leczniczego, http://leki.urpl.gov.pl/files/Metocard_tabl_dwiedawki.pdf, 5th December 2017.
  14. Kalra S, Pathak V, Jena B. Qualitative research. PerspectClin Res. 2013;4(3):192. doi:10.4103/2229-3485.115389.
  15. Dahlgren LO, Fallsberg M. Phenomenography as a qualitative approach in social pharmacy research.J SocAdm Pharm. 1991;8:150-156.
  16. Bradley EH, Currry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: Developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Services Research. 2007;42(4): 1758-1772, 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00684.x
  17. Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. USA: Sage Publications; 2002.
  18. Luk A, Aslani P. Tools used to evaluate written medicine and health information: document and user perspectives. Health EducBehav. 2011;38(4):389-403. doi:10.1177/1090198110379576.
  19. Raynor DK, Dickinson D. Key principles to guide development of consumer medicine information--content analysis of information design texts. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(4):700-706. doi:10.1345/aph.1L522.
  20. Koo MM, Krass I, Aslani P. Evaluation of written medicine information: Validation of the consumer information rating form. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(6):951-956. doi:10.1345/aph.1K083.
  21. Dickinson D, Raynor DK, Duman M. Patient information leaflets for medicines: Using consumer testing to determine the most effective design. Patient EducCouns. 2001;43(2):147-159. doi:10.1016/S0738-3991(00)00156-7.
  22. Tong V, Raynor DK, Blalock SJ, Aslani P. Exploring consumer opinions on the presentation of side-effects information in Australian Consumer Medicine Information leaflets. Health Expectations. 2014.
  23. Bickart B, Schindler RM. Internet forums as influential sources of consumer information. J Interact Mark. 2001;15(3):31-40. doi:10.1002/dir.1014.
  24. Fiksdal AS, Kumbamu A, Jadhav AS, et al. Evaluating the process of online health information searching: a qualitative approach to exploring consumer perspectives. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(10):e224. doi:10.2196/jmir.3341.
  25. Talarczyk J, Hauke J, Poniewaz M, Serdyńska-Szuster M, Pawelczyk L, Jedrzejczak P. [Internet as a source of information about infertility among infertile patients]. Ginekol Pol. 2012;83(4):250-254.
  26. Faith J, Thorburn S, Sinky TH. Exploring healthcare experiences among online interactive weight loss forum users. Comput Human Behav. 2016;57:326-333. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.048.
  27. Santer M, Muller I, Yardley L, et al. "You don"t know which bits to believe': qualitative study exploring carers' experiences of seeking information on the internet about childhood eczema. BMJ Open. 2015;5(4):e006339. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006339.
  28. Bilgrei OR. From "herbal highs" to the "heroin of cannabis": Exploring the evolving discourse on synthetic cannabinoid use in a Norwegian Internet drug forum. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;29:1-8. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2016.01.011.
  29. Palosse-Cantaloube L, Lacroix I, Rousseau V, Bagheri H, Montastruc J-L, Damase-Michel C. Analysis of chats on French internet forums about drugs and pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2014;23(12):1330-1333. doi:10.1002/pds.3709.
  30. Cole J, Watkins C, Kleine D. Health Advice from Internet Discussion Forums: How Bad Is Dangerous? J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(1):e4. doi:10.2196/jmir.5051.
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2299-1247
Język
eng
URI / DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.7365/JHPOR.2018.1.6
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu