The creation and evaluation of an ambulatory orthopedic surgical patient education web site to support empowerment

CIN - Computers Informatics Nursing

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 282-290

  Heikkinen, Katja ^a   Suomi, Reima ^b   Jääskeläinen, Miika ^c   Kaljonen, Anne ^a   Leino Kilpi, Helena ^a,c   Salanterä, Sanna ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c HOSPITAL DISTRICT OF SOUTHWEST FINLAND   (Finland)

Author keywords

Internet; Patient education; Web evaluation; Web intervention

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; ARTICLE; FEMALE; FINLAND; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION SERVICE; INTERNET; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; ORTHOPEDICS; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREOPERATIVE CARE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMANS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INTERNET; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORTHOPEDICS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

EID: 77956249899     PISSN: 15382931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/NCN.0b013e3181ec23e6     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Jariwala AC, Kandasamy ARJ, Wigderowitz CA. Patients and the internet: a demographic study of a cohort of orthopaedic out-patients. Surgeon. 2004;2:103-106.
2. Jariwala AC, Paterson CR, Cochrane L, Abboud RJ, Wigderowitz CA. Prescribing a Website. Scott Med J. 2005;50:169-171.
3. Beall MS 3rd, Beall MS Jr, Greenfield ML, Biermann JS. Patient internet use in a community outpatient orthopaedic practice. Iowa Orthop J. 2002;22:103-107.
4. Gupte CM, Hassan AN, McDermott ID, Thomas RD. The internet - friend or foe? A questionnaire study of orthopaedic out-patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002;84:187-192.
5. European Commission. European Union citizens and sources of information about health. 2003. http://ec.europa.eu/public-opinion/ archives/ebs/ebs-179-en. pdf. Accessed March 16, 2009.
6. Internet Tracking. Internetin käyttä jämää rän kehitys. 2006. http:// www.taloustutkimus.fi/in-english/. Accessed March 16, 2009.
7. Eysenbach G, Kohler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the World Wide Web? qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ. 2002; 324:573-577.
8. Rozental TD, Bozentka DJ, Beredjiklian PK. Patient education through the Internet. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;421:50-53.
9. Bensley RJ, Lewis JB. Analysis of Internet-based health assessment. Health Promot Pract. 2002;3:463-476.
10. Eysenbach G, Powell J, Kuss O, Sa ER. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287: 2691-2700.
11. Purcell GP, Wilson P, Delamothe T. The quality of health information on the Internet. BMJ. 2002;323:557-558.
12. Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, et al. Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA. 2001;285:2612-2621.
13. Clement WA, Wilson S, Bingham BJ. A guide to creating your own patient-oriented Website. J R SocMed. 2002;95:64-67.
14. Smith CE, Cha J, Puno F, Magee JD, Bingham J, van Gorp M. Quality assurance processes for designing patient education Web sites. Comput Inform Nurs. 2002;20(5):191-200.
15. Sproat SB. Principles of Web site development and design: powerful educational tools. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2002;18:68-72.
16. Wilson P. How to find the good and avoid the bad or ugly: a short guide to tools for rating quality of health information on the internet. BMJ. 2002;324:598-602.
17. The Finnish Ministry of Finance Quality Criteria of Public Online Services. Ministry of Finance. Public Management Department. 2004. http://www.suomi.fi/suomifi/qualitytotheweb/quality-criteria/ index.html. Accessed March 16, 2009.
18. Ko Y, Brown M, Frost R, Woosley RL. Brief report: development of a prescription medication information webliography for consumers. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:1313-1316.
19. Cader R, Campbell S, Watson D. Criteria used by nurses to evaluate practice-related information on the World Wide Web. Comput Inform Nurs. 2003;21:97-102.
20. Gagliardi A, Jadad AR. Examination of instruments used to rate quality of health information on the internet: chronicle of a voyage with an unclear destination. BMJ. 2002;324:569-573.
21. Brooks BA. Using the internet for patient education. Orthop Nurs. 2001;20:69-77.
22. Nicoll LH. Quick and effective Website evaluation. CIN Plus. 2000;3(3):8-9.
23. Zhang P, von Dran GN. Satisfiers and dissatisfiers: a two-factor model for Website design and evaluation. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 2000; 51(14):1253-1268.
24. Cumbo A, Agre P, Dougherty J, et al. Online cancer patient education: evaluating usability and content. Cancer Pract. 2002;10: 155-161.
25. eHealth Code of Ethics. *eHealth Ethics Intiative 2000. http://www. hi-europe.info/files/2000/ehealth-code.htm. AccessedMarch 16, 2009.
26. Health On the Net code (HON code). Health on the Net Foundation. http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Conduct.html. Accessed March 16, 2009.
27. Anderson NK, Jones AD, Martin EE, et al. Anesthetic care of the trauma patient: development of a Web-based resource. AANA J. 2007;75:49-56.
28. Keulers BJ, Welters CF, Spauwen PH, Houpt P. Can face-to-face patient education be replaced by computer-based patient education? A randomised trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67:176-182.
29. Wofford JL, Smith ED, Miller DP. The multimedia computer for office-based patient education: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;59:148-157.
30. Hassling L, Babic A, Lonn U, Casimir-Ahn H. A Web-based patient information system-identification of patients' information needs. J Med Syst. 2003;27:247-257.
31. Lewis D. Computers in patient education. Comput Inform Nurs. 2003;21(2):88-96.
32. Brennan PF, Moore SM, Bjornsdottir G, Jones J, Visovsky C, Rogers M. HeartCare: an internet-based information and support system for patient home recovery after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. J Adv Nurs. 2001;35:699-708.
33. Scherrer-Bannerman A, Fofonoff D, Minshall D, et al. Web-based education and support for patients on the cardiac surgery waiting list. J Telemed Telecare. 2000;6(2):72-74.
34. Goldsmith DM, Safran C. Using theWeb to reduce postoperative pain following ambulatory surgery. Proc AMIA Symp. 1999:780-784.
35. Hering K, Harvan J, Dangelo M, Jasinski D. The use of a computer Website prior to scheduled surgery (a pilot study): impact on patient information, acquisition, anxiety level, and overall satisfaction with anesthesia care. AANA J. 2005;73:29-33.
36. Nielsen J. Usability 101: introduction to usability. Jakob Nielsen's alertbox. 2003. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html. Accessed March 16, 2009.
37. Kirkley D, Rewick D. Evaluating clinical information systems. J Nurs Adm. 2003;33:643-651.
38. Leino-Kilpi H, Luoto E, Katajisto J. Elements of empowerment and MS patients. J Neurosci Nurs. 1998;30:116-123.
39. Leino-Kilpi H, Mäenpää I, Katajisto J. Nursing study of the significance of rheumatoid arthritis as perceived by patients using the concept of empowerment. J Orthop Nurs. 1999;3:138-145.
40. Heikkinen K, Leino-Kilpi H, Nummela T, Kaljonen A, Salanterä S. A comparison of two educational interventions for the cognitive empowerment of ambulatory orthopaedic surgery patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;73:272-279.
41. Rankinen S, Salanterä S, Heikkinen K, et al. Expectations and received knowledge by surgical patients. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:113-119.
42. Valaitis RK. Computers and the internet: tools for youth empowerment. J Med Internet Res. 2005;7:e51.
43. Martinali J, Bolman C, Brug J, van Den Borne B, Bar F. A checklist to improve patient education in a cardiology outpatient setting. Patient Educ Couns. 2001;42:231-238.
44. Morrell G. Effect of structured preoperative teaching on anxiety levels of patients scheduled for cataract surgery. Insight. 2001;26:4-9.
45. Franklin PD, Rosenbaum PF, Carey MP, RoizenMF. Using sequential e-mail messages to promote health behaviors: evidence of feasibility and reach in a worksite sample. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8:e3.
46. Nielsen J. Top ten mistakes in Web design. 2007. http://www. useit.com/alertbox/9605.html. Accessed March 16, 2009.
47. Salanterä S, Virtanen H, Johansson K, et al. Yliopistosairaalan kirjallisen potilasohjausmateriaalin analyysi. Hoitotiede. 2005; 4:217-218.
48. Burns N, Grove SK. The Practice of Nursing Research; Conduct, Critique and Utilization. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA; WB Saunders Co: 2005.
49. American Association of Anaesthesiologists. ASA Physical Status Classification System. Cited January 7, 2008. http://www.asahq. org/clinical/physicalstatus.htm. Accessed March 16, 2009.
50. Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. Lancet. 1974;2:1127-1131.
51. Rubio DM, Berg-WegerM, Tebb SS, Lee ES, Rauch S. Objectifying content validity: conducing a content validity study in social work research. Soc Work Res. 2003;27(2):94-104.
52. Grant JS, Davis LL. Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Res Nurs Health. 1997;20:269-274.