This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Ayana, M. Articles by Ebrahim, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ayana, M. Articles by Ebrahim, S. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Family Issues Personal Medical Records Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The views of therapists on the use of a patient-held record in the care of stroke patients

Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine, London

Pandora Pound

Department of Public Health Medicine, United Medical and Dental Schools of Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London

Shah Ebrahim

Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine, London, UK

Objective: To explore the views of therapists working with stroke patients on the use of a patient-held record (PHR) for stroke patients. A PHR was developed in the form of a pocket-sized booklet (21 cm x 14.5 cm) in which staff recorded information relating to the patient's management. The aim of the PHR was to facilitate communication and involve patients more directly in their care.

Methods: Six semi-structured group interviews were conducted with therapists (25 in total) from one inner city hospital.

Results: The following themes emerged from the content analysis: (1) Therapists were supportive of plans for a PHR, citing the benefits of greater patient involvement. (2) However, they questioned its feasibility, in particular the issue of patient responsibility and its use with the cognitively impaired. (3) They also questioned its ability to facilitate communication among health professionals because of existing differences in perspectives. (4) These therapists revealed concerns about the effect that information may have on patients. (5) They also raised practical issues about finding the time to make entries, wording and content of entries in the PHR.

Conclusion: Responsibility for the PHR may enhance patients' understanding and involvement in their care, yet ownership alone does not guarantee the confidence needed to encourage dialogue between patients and care providers. Furthermore, it is doubtful whether a PHR can hope to overcome the fundamental differences in the philosophies of care which the therapists reported.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 12, No. 4, 328-337 (1998)
DOI: 10.1191/026921598670772117


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. C. Kaelber, A. K. Jha, D. Johnston, B. Middleton, and D. W. Bates A Research Agenda for Personal Health Records (PHRs) J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., November 1, 2008; 15(6): 729 - 736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]