Hand‐held maternity records: are they an added burden?

Kiran, Tara; Jayawickrama, NS

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2002.00352.x

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A common perception identified was that women reported to have greater ownership and feeling more in control of their pregnancy when using a PHR [2,3,8,14,15,18,23]. It was noted that carrying notes gave women more confidence and women felt more responsible, involved and in charge of their health [3,9,22].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Women were reported as thinking that the PHR was useful and easy to use [8,20,21]. Most papers reported that women looked after their notes, would prefer to carry their own paper notes and would do so in the next pregnancy [2,14,15], [2,8,9,16,22].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most papers reported that women looked after their notes, would prefer to carry their own paper notes and would do so in the next pregnancy [2,14,15], [2,8,9,16,22]. Carrying the full PHR was also noted to improve opportunities to receive reminders and educational information and also motivated them to learn more about pregnancy [3,21-23].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seventeen were quantitative and four were assessed using both quantitative and qualitative assessment criteria. Despite six papers scoring a low rating (including editorials, responses, communications and one abstract), they were included as supplementary papers, providing contextual information from unique settings [8-13]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

In a maternity shared-care environment, what do we know about the paper hand-held and electronic health record: a systematic literature review

Hawley

Janamian

Jackson

et al. 2014

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe paper hand-held record (PHR) has been widely used as a tool to facilitate communication between health care providers and a pregnant woman. Since its inception in the 1950s, it has been described as a successful initiative, evolving to meet the needs of communities and their providers. Increasingly, the electronic health record (EHR) has dominated the healthcare arena and the maternity general practice shared-care arrangement seems to have adopted this initiative. A systematic review was conducted to determine perspectives of the PHR and the EHR with regards to data completeness; experiences of users and integration of care between women and health care providers.MethodA literature search was conducted that included papers from 1985 to 2012. Studies were chosen if they fulfilled the inclusion criteria, reporting on: data completeness; experiences of users and integration of care between women and health care providers. Papers were extracted by one reviewer in consultation with two reviewers with expertise in maternity e-health and independently assessed for quality.ResultsA total of 43 papers were identified for the review, from an initial 6,816 potentially relevant publications. No papers were found that reported on data completeness in a maternity PHR or a maternity EHR, in a shared-care setting. Women described the PHR as important to their antenatal care and had a generally positive perception of using an EHR. Hospital clinicians reported generally positive experiences using a PHR, while both positive and negative impressions were found using an EHR. The few papers describing the use of the PHR and EHR by community clinicians were also divergent and inconclusive with regards to their experiences. In a general practice shared-care model, the PHR is a valuable tool for integration between the woman and the health care provider. While the EHR is an ideal initiative in the maternity setting, facilitating referrals and communication, there are issues of fragmentation and continued paper use.ConclusionsThere was a surprising gap in knowledge surrounding data completeness on maternity PHRs or EHRs. There is also a paucity of available impressions from community clinicians using both forms of the records.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

In a maternity shared-care environment, what do we know about the paper hand-held and electronic health record: a systematic literature review

Hawley

Janamian

Jackson

et al. 2014

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Personal health records: a scoping review

Archer

Fevrier-Thomas

Lokker

et al. 2011

J Am Med Inform Assoc

511

405

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic personal health record systems (PHRs) support patient centered healthcare by making medical records and other relevant information accessible to patients, thus assisting patients in health self-management. We reviewed the literature on PHRs including design, functionality, implementation, applications, outcomes, and benefits. We found that, because primary care physicians play a key role in patient health, PHRs are likely to be linked to physician electronic medical record systems, so PHR adoption is dependent on growth in electronic medical record adoption. Many PHR systems are physician-oriented, and do not include patient-oriented functionalities. These must be provided to support self-management and disease prevention if improvements in health outcomes are to be expected. Differences in patient motivation to use PHRs exist, but an overall low adoption rate is to be expected, except for the disabled, chronically ill, or caregivers for the elderly. Finally, trials of PHR effectiveness and sustainability for patient self-management are needed.

show abstract

The Health Of Patients’ Eyes (HOPE) Glaucoma study. The effectiveness of a ‘glaucoma personal record’ for newly diagnosed glaucoma patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Forbes

Fairlamb

Jonker

2015

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGlaucoma involves progressive optic nerve fibre loss, subsequently leading to irreversible and disabling visual field defects. In Europe, the prevalence of glaucoma is approximately 2.2 % of all people aged over 40 years; this equates to 12 million people. Glaucoma patients require regular lifelong follow-up, contributing to a large financial and resource burden for the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. This study aims to determine whether providing newly diagnosed glaucoma patients with a personalised client-held eye health summary (‘glaucoma personal record’), improves patients’ knowledge of their glaucoma condition. A potential long-term benefit could be improved self-management and henceforth a slower rate of deterioration.Methods/DesignHOPE Glaucoma is a 3-year, prospective, parallel-group, pragmatic, single-centred, randomised controlled trial. An anticipated 122 adults, newly diagnosed with glaucoma (including ocular hypertension, suspected glaucoma and/or chronic open-angle glaucoma) will be recruited from a nurse-led ophthalmology outpatient clinic at a medium-sized NHS Trust. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive standard clinical care (control arm) or standard care plus a glaucoma personal record, detailing the current state of their condition (interventional arm). Participant assessments are designed to test whether provision of a glaucoma personal record 1) improves patient knowledge of glaucoma and 2) contributes to improvements in clinical outcomes, i.e. delay of visual field loss. The primary outcome measure is better client knowledge of glaucoma at the 9–12 month follow-up visit. Secondary outcome measures include the rate of visual field loss and patient-reported outcome measures on visual function (National Eye Institute VFQ – 25) measured at baseline, 9–12 months, 24 months and 36 months. Estimating a 20 % drop-out rate, the study will have 90 % power to detect a mean two-point difference in glaucoma knowledge score between groups at 5 % significance - based on two-sided Mann–Whitney U test.DiscussionIf a glaucoma personal record is found to significantly improve glaucoma patients’ knowledge of their condition, this intervention could potentially provide a low-cost, straightforward tool to educate and engage glaucoma patients. Subsequently, this could have the potential to increase patient self-management and therefore allow glaucoma patients to prolong their sight functionality for longer.Trial registrationISRCTN41306818, registered on 22 August 2013.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0863-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Hand‐held maternity records: are they an added burden?

Cited by 5 publications

References 10 publications

In a maternity shared-care environment, what do we know about the paper hand-held and electronic health record: a systematic literature review

In a maternity shared-care environment, what do we know about the paper hand-held and electronic health record: a systematic literature review

Personal health records: a scoping review

The Health Of Patients’ Eyes (HOPE) Glaucoma study. The effectiveness of a ‘glaucoma personal record’ for newly diagnosed glaucoma patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About