Access to communication technologies in a sample of cancer patients: an urban and rural survey
Ma'n Abdullah, Dale E Theobald, Donna Butler, Kurt Kroenke, Anthony Perkins, Sara Edgerton, William M Dugan Jr, Ma'n Abdullah, Dale E Theobald, Donna Butler, Kurt Kroenke, Anthony Perkins, Sara Edgerton, William M Dugan Jr
Abstract
Background: There is a growing awareness among providers of the symptom burden experienced by cancer patients. Systematic symptom screening is difficult. Our plan was to evaluate a technology-based symptom screening process using touch-tone telephone and Internet in our rural outreach cancer program in Indiana. Would rural patients have adequate access to technologies for home-based symptom reporting?
Objectives: 1) To determine access to touch-tone telephone service and Internet for patients in urban and rural clinics; 2) to determine barriers to access; 3) to determine willingness to use technology for home-based symptom reporting.
Methods: Patients from representative clinics (seven rural and three urban) in our network were surveyed. Inclusion criteria were age greater than 18, able to read, and diagnosis of malignancy.
Results: The response rate was 97%. Of 416 patients completing the survey (230 rural, 186 urban), 95% had access to touch-tone telephone service, while 46% had Internet access (56% of urban patients, 38% of rural patients). Higher rates of Internet access were related to younger patient age, current employment, and higher education and income. The primary barrier to Internet access was lack of interest. Use of the Internet for health related activities was less than 50%. The preferred means of symptom reporting in patients with internet access were the touch-tone telephone (70%), compared to reporting by the Internet (28%).
Conclusion: Access to communication technologies appears adequate for home-based symptom reporting. The use of touch-tone telephone and Internet reporting, based upon patient preference, has the potential of enhancing symptom detection among cancer patients that is not dependent solely upon clinic visits and clinician inquiry.
References
- Cleeland CS, Reyes-Gibby CC. When is it justified to treat symptoms? Measuring symptom burden. Oncology. 2002. pp. 64–70.
- Chang VT, Ingham J. Symptom control. Cancer Investigation. 2003;21:564–578. doi: 10.1081/CNV-120022376.
- Berger AM, Portenoy RK, Weissman DE. Principles and Practice of Supportive Oncology. 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 2002.
- Max MB, Portenoy RK, Laska EM. Oxford Textbook of Palliative Medicine. 2. New York: Oxford Medical Publications; 1998.
- Patrick DL, Ferketich SL, Frame PS, Harris JJ, Hendricks CB, Levin B, Link MP, Lustig C, McLaughlin J, Reid LD, Turrisi AT, 3rd, Unutzer J, Vernon SW, National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Panel National Institute of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Symptom Management in Cancer: Pain, Depression, and Fatigue, July 15–17 2002. J Natl Cancer Instit. 2003;95:1110–1117.
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Rural Health Policy
- Falling through the net: toward digital inclusion A report on Americans' access to technology tools, US Dept of Commerce Washington, DC. 2000.
- Anderson JE, Nelson DE, Wilson RW. Telephone coverage and measurement of health risk indicators: data from the National Health Interview Survey. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1392–1395.
- The Pew Internet and American life project
- Incontext. Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. 2003.
- Eysenbach G. The impact of the internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53:356–371.
- Katz SJ, Stern DT, Dobias K, Moyer CA, Cox D. Effect of a triage-based email system on clinic resource use in primary care [Abstract] J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:199.
- Murray E, Lo B, Pollack L, Donelan K, Catania J, White M, Zapert K, Turner R. The impact of health information on the Internet on the physician-patient relationship. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1727–1734. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.14.1727.
Source: PubMed