Investigating the Association Between Internet Health Information Use and Patient Willingness to Communicate with Health Care Providers

ABSTRACT

Communication between health professionals and patients is an intergroup phenomenon where the health professional has the most power and status. Over the past few decades, there has been a steady increase in the availability to patients of information about healthcare and specific diseases on the Internet. In this paper, we ask whether the use of Internet health information assists patients to manage their consultations with health professionals better and whether it alters the intergroup dynamic by providing a more equal status for patients. In this study 370 participants from Australia and Canada completed a survey that included a ‘willingness to communicate with health professionals’ scale. They also commented on their use and trust of Internet health information. Thematic analysis suggests that patients’ use of Internet health information serves as a broker between patients and their health provider in health consultations. We discuss the implications of these findings for health practitioners as they address how easier Internet access influences patient interactions with health professionals. We consider future research directions these finding provide in explaining communication behaviour in this context.     

美国的听力师教育

随着婴儿潮、人口老龄化及新技术的广泛应用，人们对听力保健的需求显著增加。在美国，听力保健服务由助听设备专员、耳鼻喉科医生和听力师3类人员提供，其中听力师提供除医疗、手术外宽泛的听力保健服务。美国的听力保健服务体系及听力师教育体系经历了一个渐进的过程：20年前对从业人员的学历要求是听力学硕士，随着对服务质量要求的提高和服务范围的扩大，美国听力师逐渐要求专业博士学位（Au.D），毕业后还需3～4年的专门教育才能成为一名听力师。听力师教育有统一的标准，大学课程要通过听力教育认证委员会（the Accreditation Commission for Audiology Education， ACAE）或学术认证委员会（the Council on Academic Accreditation，CAA）的多程序严格的认证才能被承认。美国听力师需求存在巨大缺口，但是各国听力学教育标准不统一及听力师收入与教育投资不匹配，阻碍了更多的人进入这一领域。美国试图通过改变教育模式，降低教育成本及革新教学方法等改善听力师教育状况，但是听力师教育体系远未完善。     

Pioglitazone has a dubious bladder cancer risk but an undoubted cardiovascular benefit

On 8 April 2014, a US jury ordered Takeda and Eli Lilly to pay $9 bn in punitive damages after finding that they had concealed the cancer risks associated with pioglitazone. By contrast, on 28 August 2014, the long‐awaited outcome of the 10‐year Kaiser Permanente Northern California study was announced. That study was specifically designed to investigate whether patients exposed to pioglitazone were at an increased risk of bladder cancer and found no association; thus, at last, the controversial issue has been resolved. A review, in retrospect, of the story of the proposed link between pioglitazone and bladder cancer reveals flaws at every stage. In 2012, a BMJ editorial, in keeping with some other contemporary reports, stated ‘it can confidently be assumed that pioglitazone increases the risk of bladder cancer’. Examination of the information which led to such a statement shows that: 1) the pre‐clinical findings of bladder cancer in male rats is not indicative of human risk; 2) there is no association between bladder cancer and pioglitazone in randomized controlled trials, once cases that could not plausibly be related to treatment are removed; and 3) the observational studies that have suggested a link have over‐extrapolated from the data: pioglitazone‐treated patients had more risk factors for bladder cancer than those not treated with pioglitazone. Meanwhile careful study of randomized controlled trials shows evidence of cardiovascular benefit from pioglitazone in Type 2 diabetes, a condition which results, more than anything, in premature cardiovascular death and morbidity.