OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated a Web-based tool to help patients with schizophrenia communicate with clinicians about evidence-based treatments. METHODS:Fifty patients used aninteractive Web-based intervention featuring actors simulating a patient discussing treatment concerns (intervention group; N=24) or were shown an educational video about schizophrenia treatment before an appointment for routine follow-up care (control group; N=26). The visits were recorded and analyzed by using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. RESULTS: Visits by patients in the intervention group were longer (24 versus 19 minutes, p<.05) and had a proportionately greater patient contribution to the dialogue (288 versus 229 statements, p<.05) and a smaller ratio of clinician to patient talk (1.1 versus 1.4, p<.05) compared with visits by the control group. Patients in the intervention group asked more questions about treatment (2 versus .9, p<.05), disclosed more lifestyle information (76 versus 53 statements, p<.005), and more often checked that they understood information (3.6 versus 2.1 checks, p<.05). Clinicians asked more questions about treatment (7.5 versus 5.1, p<.05) and the medical condition (7.8 versus 4.7, p<.05) to control group patients but made more statements of empathy (1.3 versus .4, p<.03) and cues of interest (48 versus 22, p<.05) with the intervention group. The patient-centeredness ratio was greater for visits by patients in the intervention group than by the control group (8.5 versus 3.2, p<.05). Patients' tone was more dominant and respectful (p<.05) and clinicians' tone was more sympathetic (p<.05) during visits by patients in the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The Web-based tool empowered persons with schizophrenia to engage more fully in a patient-centered dialogue about their treatment.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated a Web-based tool to help patients with schizophrenia communicate with clinicians about evidence-based treatments. METHODS: Fifty patients used an interactive Web-based intervention featuring actors simulating a patient discussing treatment concerns (intervention group; N=24) or were shown an educational video about schizophrenia treatment before an appointment for routine follow-up care (control group; N=26). The visits were recorded and analyzed by using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. RESULTS: Visits by patients in the intervention group were longer (24 versus 19 minutes, p<.05) and had a proportionately greater patient contribution to the dialogue (288 versus 229 statements, p<.05) and a smaller ratio of clinician to patient talk (1.1 versus 1.4, p<.05) compared with visits by the control group. Patients in the intervention group asked more questions about treatment (2 versus .9, p<.05), disclosed more lifestyle information (76 versus 53 statements, p<.005), and more often checked that they understood information (3.6 versus 2.1 checks, p<.05). Clinicians asked more questions about treatment (7.5 versus 5.1, p<.05) and the medical condition (7.8 versus 4.7, p<.05) to control group patients but made more statements of empathy (1.3 versus .4, p<.03) and cues of interest (48 versus 22, p<.05) with the intervention group. The patient-centeredness ratio was greater for visits by patients in the intervention group than by the control group (8.5 versus 3.2, p<.05). Patients' tone was more dominant and respectful (p<.05) and clinicians' tone was more sympathetic (p<.05) during visits by patients in the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The Web-based tool empowered persons with schizophrenia to engage more fully in a patient-centered dialogue about their treatment.
Authors: Anthony F Lehman; Julie Kreyenbuhl; Robert W Buchanan; Faith B Dickerson; Lisa B Dixon; Richard Goldberg; Lisa D Green-Paden; Wendy N Tenhula; Daniela Boerescu; Cenk Tek; Neil Sandson; Donald M Steinwachs Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2004 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Catherine M Reich; Samantha M Hack; Elizabeth A Klingaman; Clayton H Brown; Li Juan Fang; Lisa B Dixon; Danielle R Jahn; Julie A Kreyenbuhl Journal: Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract Date: 2017-09-17 Impact factor: 1.812
Authors: Peter F Buckley; Nina R Schooler; Donald C Goff; John Hsiao; Alexander Kopelowicz; John Lauriello; Theo Manschreck; Alan J Mendelowitz; Del D Miller; Joanne B Severe; Daniel R Wilson; Donna Ames; Juan Bustillo; Jim Mintz; John M Kane Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 9.306