Patients with cancer and e-mail: Implications for clinical communication

Supportive Care in Cancer

Volumn 17, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1049-1056

  Dilts, David ^a   Ridner, Sheila H ^b   Franco, Alejandro ^c   Murphy, Barbara ^d  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

^c Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center ^*  (Colombia)

^d VANDERBILT INGRAM CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Barriers; Cancer; Communication; E mail; Patient

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956461862     PISSN: 09414355     EISSN: 14337339     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-008-0538-6     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baker L, Wagner TH, Singer S, Bundorf MK (2003) Use of the Internet and e-mail for health care information results from a national survey. JAMA 289:2400-2406. doi:10.1001/jama.289.18.2400
2. Borowitz SM, Wyatt JC (1998) The origin, content, and workload of e-mail consultations. JAMA 280:1321-1324. doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1321
3. California Health Foundation (2000) Ethics survey of consumer attitudes about health web sites. Conducted by Cyber Dialogue and the Institute for the Future
4. Couchman GR, Forjuoh SN, Rascoe TG (2001) E-mail communications in family practice: what do patients expect. J Fam Pract 50:414-418
5. Daft RL, Lengel RH (1986) Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Manage Sci 32:554-571
6. Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13:319-340. doi:10.2307/249008
7. Davis TC, Williams MV, Marin E, Parker RM, Glass J (2002) Health literacy and cancer communication. CA Cancer J Clin 52:134-149
8. Eysenbach G (2003) The impact of the internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 53:356-371
9. Eysenbach G, Diepgen TL (1998) Responses to unsolicited patient e-mail requests for medical advice on the world wide web. JAMA 280:1333-1335. doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1333
10. Fang K (1998) An analysis of electronic-mail usage. Comput Human Behav 14:349-374. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00012-0
11. Fox S, Fallows D (2003) Health searches and email have become more commonplace, but there is room for improvement in searches and overall internet access. Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC
12. Fox S, Rainie L (2000) The online health care revolution: how the web helps Americans take better care of themselves. The Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC
13. Fridsma DB, Ford P, Altman R (1994) A survey of patient access to electronic mail: attitudes, barriers, and opportunities. Proceeds of the Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care 18:15-19
14. Hughes JA, Pakieser RA (1999) Factors that impact nurses' use of electronic mail (e-mail). Comput Nurs 17:251-258
15. Kagan SH, Clarke SP, Happ MB (2005) Surgeon's and nurse's use of e-mail communication with head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck 27:108-113. doi:10.1002/hed.20119
16. Kagan SH, Clarke SP, Happ MB (2005) Head and neck cancer patient and family member interest in and use of e-mail to communicate with clinicians. Head Neck 27:976-981. doi:10.1002/hed.20263
17. Kane B, Sands DZ (1998) Guidelines for the clinical use of electronic mail with patients. J Am Med Inform Assoc 5(1):104-111
18. Karahanna E, Straub DW (1999) The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Inf Manage 35:237-250. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(98) 00096-2
19. Katzen C, Solan MJ, Dicker AP (2005) E-mail and oncology: a survey of radiation oncology patients and their attitudes to a new generation of health communication. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 8:189-193. doi:10.1038/sj.pcan. 4500797
20. Mandl KD, Kohane IS, Brandt AM (1998) Electronic patient- physician communication: problems and promise. Ann Intern Med 129:495-500
21. Mandl KD, Kohane IS (1999) Healthconnect: clinical grade patient-physician communication. Proceedings, AMIA Annual Symposium, pp 849-853
22. Mandl KD, Feit S, Pena BMG, Kohane IS (2000) Growth and determinants of access in patient e-mail and internet use. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 154:508-511
23. Mandl KD, Katz SB, Kohane IS (1998) Social equity and access to the world wide web and e-mail: implications for design and implementation of medical applications. Proceedings, AMIA Annual Symposium 215-9
24. Merriman B, Ades T, Seffrin JR (2002) Health literacy in the information age: Communicating cancer information to patients and families. CA Cancer J Clin 52:130-133
25. Metz JM, Devine P, DeNittis A, Jones H, Hampshire M, Goldwein J et al (2003) A multi-institutional study of internet utilization by radiation oncology patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:1201-1205. doi:10.1016/S0360-3016(03) 00407-3
26. National-Telecommunicatio ns-and-Information-Admini stration (2001) Definition: e-mail. US Department of Commerce,Washington, DC
27. National-Telecommunications-and-Information-Administration (2000) Falling through the net: defining the digital divide. US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
28. National-Telecommunications-and-Information-Administration (2000) Falling through the net: toward digital inclusion, a report on Americans' access to technology tools. US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
29. Neill RA, Mainous AG 3rd, Clark JR, Hagen MD (1994) The utility of electronicmail as amediumfor patient-physician communication. Arch Fam Med 3:268. doi:10.1001/archfami.3.3.268
30. Neinstein L (2000) Utilization of electronic communication (e-mail) with patients at university and college health centers. J Adolesc Health 27(1):6-11. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(99)00119-6
31. Norum J (2001) Evaluation of Norwegian cancer hospitals' web sites and explorative survey among cancer patients on their use of the Internet. J Med Internet Res 3(4):e30 (online)
32. Norum J, Grev A, Moen MA, Balteskard L, Holthe K (2003) Information and communication technology (ICT) in oncology. Patients' and relatives' experiences and suggestions. Support Care Cancer 11:286-293
33. Robinson C, Flowers CW, Alperson BL, Norris KC (1999) Internet access and use among disadvantaged inner-city patients. JAMA 281:988-989. doi:10.1001/jama.281.11.988-a
34. Speilberg A (1998) On call and online: sociohistorical, legal, and ethical implications of e-mail for the patient-physician relationship. JAMA 280:1353-1359. doi:10.1001/jama.280.15.1353
35. Taylor H, Leitman R (2001) Study reveals big potential for the internet to improve doctor-patient relations. Harris Interact Health Care News 1:1
36. Teo SHT, Lim VKG, Lai RYC (1999) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage. Omega. Int J Manage Sci 27(1):25-37