Feasibility of web-based decision aids in neurological patients

Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 48-52

  van Til, Janine A ^a   Drossaert, Constance H C ^a   Renzenbrink, Gerbert J ^b   Snoek, Govert J ^b   Dijkstra, Evelien ^a   Stiggelbout, Anne M ^c   Ijzerman, Maarten J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b Rehabilitation Centre 'Het Roessingh'   (Netherlands)

^c LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CERVICAL SPINE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EVALUATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INTERNET; INTERVIEW; LIMB; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; SPINAL CORD INJURY; STROKE;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EXTREMITIES; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SPINAL CORD INJURIES; STROKE;

EID: 75849161275     PISSN: 1357633X     EISSN: 17581109     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2009.001012     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bernat JL. Informed consent. Muscle Nerve 2001;24:614-21
2. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 1997;44:681-92
3. Ford S, Schofield T, Hope T. What are the ingredients for a successful evidence-based patient choice consultation? A qualitative study. Soc Sci Med 2003;56:589-602
4. Robinson A, Thomson R. Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools. Qual Health Care 2001;10 (Suppl. 1):i34-8
5. Ford S, Schofield T, Hope T. Barriers to the evidence-based patient choice (EBPC) consultation. Patient Educ Couns 2002;47:179-85
6. Proot IM, Abu-Saad HH, de Esch-Janssen WP, Crebolder HFJM, ter Meulen RH. Patient autonomy during rehabilitation: the experiences of stroke patients in nursing homes. Int J Nurs Stud 2000;37:267-76
7. Proot IM, Crebolder HF, Abu-Saad HH, Macor TH, Ter Meulen RH. Stroke patients' needs and experiences regarding autonomy at discharge from nursing home. Patient Educ Couns 2000;41:275-83
8. O'Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Couns 1998;33:267-79
9. Holmes-Rovner M, Valade D, Orlowski C, Draus C, Nabozny-Valerio B, Keiser S. Implementing shared decision-making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities. Health Expect 2000;3:182-91
10. O'Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ 1999;319:731-4
11. Bekker HL, Hewison J, Thornton JG. Understanding why decision aids work: linking process with outcome. Patient Educ Couns 2003;50:323-9
12. Elwyn G, O'Connor A, Stacey D, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ 2006;333:417
13. Whelan T, Sawka C, Levine M, et al. Helping patients make informed choices: a randomized trial of a decision aid for adjuvant chemotherapy in lymph node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:581-7
14. O'Connor AM, Stacey D, Entwistle V, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003(2):CD001431
15. Wain HR, Kneebone II, Billings J. Patient experience of neurologic rehabilitation: a qualitative investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:1366-71
16. Snoek GJ, van Til JA, Krabbe PF, Ijzerman MJ. Decision for reconstructive interventions of the upper limb in individuals with tetraplegia: the effect of treatment characteristics. Spinal Cord 2008;46:228-33
17. Koedoot N, Molenaar S, Oosterveld P, et al. The decisional conflict scale: further validation in two samples of Dutch oncology patients. Patient Educ Couns 2001;45:187-93
18. Degner LF, Sloan JA. Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play? J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:941-50
19. van der Heijden H. Factors influencing the usage of websites: the case of a generic portal in The Netherlands. Information and Management 2003;40:541-9
20. Wachters-Kaufmann C, Schuling J, The H, Meyboom-de Jong B. Actual and desired information provision after a stroke. Patient Educ Couns 2005;56:211-7
21. Molenaar S, Sprangers MA, Postma-Schuit FC, et al. Feasibility and effects of decision aids. Med Decis Making 2000;20:112-27
22. Rothert ML, Holmes-Rovner M, Rovner D, et al. An educational intervention as decision support for menopausal women. Res Nurs Health 1997;20:377-87
23. Say RE, Thomson R. The importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions-challenges for doctors. BMJ 2003;327: 542-5
24. Benbassat J, Pilpel D, Tidhar M. Patients' preferences for participation in clinical decision making: a review of published surveys. Behav Med 1998;24:81-8