ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying therapies are given to people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to reduce disease progression and relapse frequency. Current modes of administration include oral, injectable and infusion therapy and the treatment decision-making process is complex. A novel mode of treatment administration, an implantable device, is currently under development, yet patient attitudes about the device are unknown. The aim of this study was 1) to understand the treatment decision-making process from the patient perspective and 2) to explore the possible acceptance of an implant to treat MS. METHODS: Focus groups with people with MS were conducted in the Netherlands. Three topics were addressed: the treatment decision-making process, the current treatment landscape, and attitudes about the implantable device. All focus groups were recorded and transcribed and data were analyzed by raw data coding and creating themes. An online survey was conducted in the Netherlands to quantify interest in an implant. RESULTS: Two focus group sessions were held (n=16 participants) and n=93 persons filled out the survey. The main theme that emerged was the constant uncertainty persons with MS face throughout their disease course and during treatment decisions (when to start, stop, continue or switch treatment). Patients were generally positive towards the implant but felt that efficacy and safety should be guaranteed. CONCLUSION: People with MS want some form of control over their disease and treatment course. New medical technologies, such as an implant, may enhance the treatment landscape and with caution we postulate that it may be accepted by patients as a new mode of administration, though further research is needed. For medical technologies to be successful, patients should be engaged early on in the design process.
ABSTRACT
In this study we aimed to assess the perceived effectiveness of clinical pathway management software for healthcare professionals. A case study on the clinical pathway management software program Check-It was performed in three departments at an academic medical center. Four months after the implementation of the software, interviews were held with healthcare professionals who work with the system. The interview questions were posed in a semi-structured interview format and the participant were asked about the perceived positive or negative effects of Check-It, and whether they thought the software is effective for them. The interviews were recorded and transcribed based on grounded theory, using different coding techniques. Our results showed fewer overlooked tasks, pre-filled orders and letters, better overview, and increased protocol insight as positive aspects of using the software. Being not flexible enough was experienced as a negative aspect.
Subject(s)
Critical Pathways , Qualitative Research , Health Personnel , Humans , Perception , SoftwareABSTRACT
The medical trauma record, produced in the Accident & Emergency Departments (AEDs) receives much attention from both health-care professionals and parties interested in quality of care. While it is an important data source for health-care professionals in their everyday work, and for quality assessment by third parties, the (paper) medical record is usually negatively evaluated because of incompleteness. In this article, we show that completeness is relative to the purpose for which the record is used. We distinguish two contexts in which the trauma record is used: the primary-care process at the AED, and assessment and monitoring of trauma care. Incompleteness of the medical record is valued differently in these contexts. Especially with regard to the information demands of quality assessment, and more specifically the national trauma registry, the work processes in the AED have not evolved sufficiently as yet. Information technology has great power to improve completeness and to facilitate quality assessment, but it cannot solve the problem of incompleteness in itself. One solution we propose is to restructure the recording process by introducing a clerk. This clerk could also be a nurse or physician who is temporarily released from direct patient care.
