&lt;p&gt;A qualitative study on the design and development of an mHealth app to facilitate communication with the Deaf community: perspective of community pharmacists&lt;/p&gt;

Chong, Elizabeth Y.; Palanisamy, Uma Devi; Jacob, Sabrina Anne

doi:10.2147/ppa.s182516

Cited by 17 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It enables health care providers and organizations to offer information and services to patients and caregivers through digital tools . The development of complex automated systems to generate, store, share, and disseminate health‐related information to different stakeholders has augmented interpersonal health communication . Mobile‐based systems are also being used to track health behaviors and collect health data with less effort and cost .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In many such ways, digital health technologies are changing the way people interact in the modern health care ecosystem . Several studies have shown health benefits following the adoption of digital communication in health care, including effective and efficient management of health conditions, shared decision making, improved care for chronic diseases, and better relationship among the patients and providers . On the other hand, the use of digital technologies in health has also introduced new challenges including privacy concerns, diminished in‐person face‐to‐face communication, limited digital health literacy in underserved populations, persistent digital divide, and public trust issues…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Digital interventions to facilitate patient‐provider communication in cancer care: A systematic review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Patient-provider communication is a critical component of cancer care. Digital tools have been applied to facilitate cancer care and patient-provider communication. However, to date, there is no systematic review on this growing body of literature. The objective of this study is to identify the existing digital interventions to improve patient-provider communication among cancer patients and survivors, summarize their characteristics, and synthesize the outcomes of these interventions. Methods: We searched the databases of PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines with the following criteria: (a) empirical studies focusing on digital interventions to facilitate communication between cancer patients or survivors and their health care providers, (b) reporting qualitative or quantitative health outcomes of the cancer patients or survivors after the digital intervention, and (c) English articles published after 2000. Results: The initial literature search generated 1006 articles; only 13 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were conducted among breast, prostate, and lung cancer patients. Ten out of 13 studies used randomized controlled trials to evaluate intervention efficacy. The outcomes assessed included symptoms reporting and management, decision making, distress and quality of life, and utilization of health care. Most studies reported positive outcomes following the interventions. Conclusions: The existing evidence on the number, characteristics, and outcomes of digital interventions to improve patient-provider communication suggests the preliminary efficacy of such interventions. It is essential to develop and implement more evidence-based digital interventions to engage patients, enhance patient-provider communication, and facilitate patient-centered decision making to improve patientcentered health outcomes, especially in underserved communities of cancer patients and survivors. K E Y W O R D S cancer patients, cancer survivors, digital intervention, patient-provider communication, review

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital interventions to facilitate patient‐provider communication in cancer care: A systematic review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 58 Malaysian DHOH individuals have also expressed that pharmacists should attend sign language training which would help them learn about Deaf culture. 35 Solutions to providing accessible healthcare to DHOH patients should not only be limited to ensuring accessible communication in sign language but also, extended towards providing culturally sensitive Deaf services.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 34 This was further supported in another Malaysian study where community pharmacists found it challenging to communicate with DHOH patients which may have been attributed to their lack of knowledge on the sociocultural aspect of deafness. 35 To date, the cultural competency movement in Malaysia’s pharmacy education has been slow in uptake. This may be owed to the lack of established accreditation standards addressing cultural competency in pharmacy programmes and the absence of guidelines on cultural competency from the Ministry of Health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of community pharmacists’ communication and comfort levels when interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing patients

Chong¹,

Jacob²,

Ramadas³

et al. 2021

Pharm Pract (Granada)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Deaf and hard of hearing patients who use sign language face considerable communication barriers while accessing pharmacy services. Low comfort-levels between community pharmacists and Deaf and hard of hearing patients result in poor interactions and increase patient safety risks. Objective: 1) To examine the way community pharmacists interact with Deaf and hard of hearing patients in Malaysia, and their level of comfort in such interactions. 2) To examine how comfort-levels vary by the preferred communication methods, resources and employer support. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among registered community pharmacists practicing in Malaysia. Questionnaire items included comfort-levels of community pharmacists when interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing patients, used and preferred communication methods, necessary resources, and perceived employer’s level of support. Based on the list of registered pharmacies, the questionnaire with a pre-paid return envelope was mailed out while pharmacies close to the university were approached in person. This questionnaire was distributed online using Google Form. Comparisons between comfort-levels and study parameters were analyzed using independent t-tests and ANOVA. Results: A total of 297 community pharmacists responded (response rate 29.2%). Higher comfort-levels were reported in those who had received between 1 to 5 prescriptions as compared to those who did not receive prescriptions from Deaf and hard of hearing patients (MD= -0.257, SD=0.104, p=0.042). More than 80% used written information and only 3.4% had used the services of a qualified sign language interpreter throughout their community pharmacist career. Significantly lower comfort-levels (p=0.0004) were reported in community pharmacists who perceived training in sign language as a necessity to interact with Deaf and hard of hearing patients (M=3.6, SD=0.9) versus those who were not interested in sign language training (M=3.8, SD=0.6). Conclusions: The results suggest that community pharmacists were neither extremely comfortable nor averse when interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing patients. The lack of significant findings in terms of comfort-levels may indicate other potential drivers for their choice of communication method when interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing patients.

show abstract

“…Access to health care for Deaf and Hard of Hearing (D&HH) patients has proven to be a global challenge [5][6][7][8]. A study conducted among 91 Deaf individuals and their experiences with using American Sign Language (ASL) in the healthcare environment found that D&HH individuals were afraid of miscommunication with their physician and preferred the use of an interpreter [9]. According to a systematic review of specialized healthcare for D&HH people, hospitals and health care systems in 30 countries had access to a quali ed sign language interpreter; however, the availability of those interpreter services was still limited [6,8,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Medical Students’ Knowledge of the Deaf Culture and Community in Puerto Rico: A Descriptive Study.

Lozano

Kung

Rivera-González

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Effective communication between health care professionals and Deaf and Hard of Hearing (D&HH) patients remains a challenge. Literature regarding health professionals’ knowledge of the D&HH community and their barriers towards health care access is limited in Puerto Rico and suggests a need for research. Therefore, this descriptive study aims to evaluate future physician’s knowledge about the Deaf culture and community in a student cohort at San Juan Bautista School of Medicine (SJBSM).Methods: A survey utilized in a previous study by Hoang et al. was targeted to 230 medical students to evaluate their knowledge of (D&HH) patients. The survey consisted of three parts testing awareness, exposure, and knowledge of the Deaf community. Responses from the Knowledge section were graded using an answer key, and correct answers were added to create an overall continuous sum score per participant, with higher scores meaning higher knowledge. Participants also were asked to write in possible issues deaf patients may face when hospitalized, excluding communication problems. All data were recorded and used for descriptive analysis.Results: 158 (68%) medical students participated. 63% reported exposure to D&HH people, and 80% were aware of the Deaf culture. 21% of students answered to have attended an American Sign Language (ASL) class, and 86% expressed interest in taking an ASL class. The overall percentage of correct answers of all the medical classes evaluated was 39%, with increasing percent knowledge as medical student year increased. The most frequently listed problem by respondents that deaf patients may face when hospitalized was dealing with an emergency in the hospital, such as the fire alarm.Conclusion: Students from clinical years (MSIII & MSIV) showed a better understanding of the Deaf culture when compared to students in pre-clinical years (MSI & MSII). Nevertheless, knowledge was limited in all groups. The information generated is not only valuable for our school but the health-care community as well. The literature related to Deaf culture, particularly in the medical setting in Puerto Rico, is limited. Therefore, there exists a need to continue investigating ways to improve medical students’ education of the Deaf culture and community.

show abstract

<p>A qualitative study on the design and development of an mHealth app to facilitate communication with the Deaf community: perspective of community pharmacists</p>

Cited by 17 publications

References 31 publications

Digital interventions to facilitate patient‐provider communication in cancer care: A systematic review

Digital interventions to facilitate patient‐provider communication in cancer care: A systematic review

Assessment of community pharmacists’ communication and comfort levels when interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing patients

Assessing Medical Students’ Knowledge of the Deaf Culture and Community in Puerto Rico: A Descriptive Study.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About