Display options
Cite
Watson ID. A patient focused relationship for specialists in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019;57(3):383-387doi: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0604.
Watson, I. D. (2019). A patient focused relationship for specialists in laboratory medicine. Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 57(3), 383-387. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0604
Watson, Ian D. "A patient focused relationship for specialists in laboratory medicine." Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine vol. 57,3 (2019): 383-387. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0604
Watson ID. A patient focused relationship for specialists in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019 Feb 25;57(3):383-387. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0604. PMID: 30218602.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019 Feb 25;57(3):383-387. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0604.

A patient focused relationship for specialists in laboratory medicine.

Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine

Ian D Watson

Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Biochemistry, University Hospital Aintree, Liverpool, UK.

PMID: 30218602 DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0604

Abstract

Technological change is driving individualized healthcare delivery including laboratory medicine. Ensuring patients gain from their empowerment it is essential that they access data that enables them to utilize reliable information. The potential difficulties of comprehension, information retention and imperfect modes of communication can significantly impair utilization of information by patients. Support for understanding and decision-making needs to be clinically competent and integrated within the healthcare team. Specialists in laboratory medicine are well placed to undertake such a role, the issues around this are explored and proposals for better direct engagement with patients made.

Keywords: collaborative healthcare; direct patient contact; improving patient understanding; knowledge management; patient engagement

References

  1. The 1000 Genomes Project. An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature 2012;491:56–65. - PubMed
  2. Turnbull C, Scott RH, Thomas E, Jones L, Murugaesu N, Pretty FB, et al. The 100,000 Genomes Project: bringing whole genome sequencing to the NHS. Br Med J 2018;361:k1687. - PubMed
  3. Policies for Ageing well with ICT. https://ec.europa.eu/digital- single-market/en/policies/ageing-well-ict. Accessed: 23 May 2018. - PubMed
  4. IT Future of Medicine. http://www.itfom.eu. Accessed: 23 May 2018. - PubMed
  5. Virtual Physiological Human. http://www.vph-institute.org. Accessed: 23 May 2018. - PubMed
  6. NIH Human Microbiome Project. https://www.hmpdacc.org. Accessed: 23 May 2018. - PubMed
  7. Tutton R. Personalizing medicine: future, present and past. Soc Sci Med 2012;75:1721–8. - PubMed
  8. Shah SG, Fitton R, Hannan A, Fisher B, Young T, Barnett J. Accessing personal medical records online: a means to what ends? Int J Med Info 2015;84:111–8. - PubMed
  9. Campbell B, Linzer G, Dufour DR. Lab tests online and consumer understanding of laboratory testing. Clin Chim Acta 2014;432:162–5. - PubMed
  10. Ryan A, Wilson S, Greenfield S, Clifford S, McManus RJ, Pattison HM. Range of self-tests available to buy in the United Kingdom: an internet survey. J Pub Health 2006;28:370–4. - PubMed
  11. Ronda G, Portegijs P, Dinant G-J, Buntinx F, Norg R, van der Weijden T. Use of diagnostic self-tests on body materials among Internet users in the Netherlands: prevalence and correlates of use. BMC Public Health 2009;9:100. - PubMed
  12. Watson ID, Wilkie P, Hannan A, Beastall GH. Role of laboratory medicine in collaborative healthcare. Clin Chem Lab Med 2019;57:134–42. - PubMed
  13. MSL Gesundheitsstudie 2012. https://de.slideshare.net/NI0049/mslgesundheitsstudie-2012/. Accessed: 23 May 2013. - PubMed
  14. eSante. http://www.e-sante.fr. Accessed: 23 May 2018; WebMD. https://www.webmd.com. Accessed: 23 May 2018. - PubMed
  15. Wilson S, Ryan AV, Greenfield SM, Clifford SC, Holder RL, Pattison HM, et al. Self-testing for cancer: a community survey. BMC Cancer 2008;8:102. - PubMed
  16. Grispen JE, Ickenroth MH, de Vries NK, vd Weijden T, Ronda G. Quality and use of consumer information provided with home test kits: room for improvement. Health Expect 2012;17:741–52. - PubMed
  17. Declaration of the International Conference on Primary Care, Alma-Ata, 6–12 September 1978. - PubMed
  18. Jadad AR, Rizo CA, Enkin MW. I ama good patient believe it or not. Br Med J 2003;326:1293–4. - PubMed
  19. Riggare S. E-patients hold key to the future of healthcare. Br Med J 2018;360:k846. - PubMed
  20. Ferreira A, Correia A, Silva A, Corte A, Pinto A, Saavedra A, et al. Why facilitate access to medical records. Med Care Comp 2007;4:77–90. - PubMed
  21. Dawson E, Savitsky K, Dunning D. “Don’t tell me, I don’t want to know”: understanding people’s reluctance to obtain medical diagnostic information. J Appl Soc Psychol 2006;36:751–68. - PubMed
  22. van Ravesteijn H, van Dijk I, Darmon D, van de Laar F, Lucassen P, Hartman TO, et al. The reassuring value of diagnostic tests: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2012;86:3–8. - PubMed
  23. Hobbs FD, Erhardt LR, Rycroft C. The from the heart study: a global survey of patient understanding of cholesterol management and cardiovascular risk, and physician-patient communication. Curr Med Res Opinion 2008;24:1267–78. - PubMed
  24. Fagerlin A, Sepucha KR, Couper MP, Levin CA, Singer E, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Patients’ knowledge about 9 common health conditions: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Making 2010; 30 Suppl 5:35S–52S. - PubMed
  25. Falcon M, Rosario SM, Dolores PC, Eduardo O, Aurelio L. Health-related information provided to patients attending a private clinic for laboratory tests in Spain. Patient Educ Couns 2010;78:134–7. - PubMed
  26. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. Communicating data about the benefits and harms of treatment: a randomized trial. Ann Int Med 2011;155:87–96. - PubMed
  27. Fuller R, Dudley N, Blacktop J. How informed is consent? Understanding of pictorial and verbal probability information by medical inpatients. Postgrad Med J 2002;78:543–4. - PubMed
  28. Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Witteman HO, Fuhrel-Forbis A, Exe NL, Kahn VC, Dickson M. Animated graphics for comparing two risks: a cautionary tale. J Med Internet Res 2012;25:e104. - PubMed
  29. Sepucha KR, Fagerlin A, Couper MP, Levin CA, Singer E, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. How does feeling informed relate to being informed? The DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Making 2010; 30 Suppl 5:77S–84S. - PubMed
  30. Watson ID, Siodmiak J, Oosterhuis WP, Corberand J, Jorgensen PE, Dikman ZG, et al. European views on patients directly obtaining their laboratory test results. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1961–6. - PubMed
  31. Watson ID, Oosterhuis WP, Jorgensen PE, Dikmen ZG, Siodmiak J, Jovicic S, et al. European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Patient Focused Laboratory Medicine. A survey of patients views from eight European countries of interpretive support from Specialists in Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:1496–500. - PubMed
  32. Rapid Response Report. Personal electronic health records: a review of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and guidelines. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Agency Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2016. - PubMed
  33. Cushman R, Froomkin AM, Cava A, Abril P, Goodman KW. Ethical, legal and social issues for personal health records and applications. J Biomed Info 2010;43:551–5. - PubMed
  34. Meslin EM, Alpert SA, Carroll AE, Odell JD, Tierney WM, Schwartz PH. Giving patients granular control of personal health information: using an ethics ‘Points to Consider’ to inform informatics system designers. Int J Med Info 2013;82:1136–43. - PubMed
  35. Myers GL, Miller WG, Coresh J, Fleming J, Greenburg N, Greene T, et al. Recommendations for improving serum creatinine measurement: a report from the laboratory working group of the national kidney disease education program. Clin Chem 2006;52:5–18. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types