I met Trisha Torrey, who writes a Patient Empowerment Blog, at the 2009 Connected Health Symposium in Boston, October 21-22. She wrote about my research in Your First Medical Opinion – Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? and included a poll. The results (you see them after you vote) show that 55% of the 40 respondents so far ”don’t usually tell my doctor about my online research”. Trisha has also written about Sharing Internet Health Information With Your Doctor where she presents a collaborative approach and guidelines for sharing information with a doctor, starkly contrasting with the patient rather scathingly portrayed in When the Patient Is a Googler.

I presented about patient-provider communication at the Medicine 2.0 Conference in Toronto September 18, 2009.  My extended abstract, Improving Patient-Physician Communication about Internet Use: Why “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Doesn’t Work, follows:

Background: A disconnect currently exists between patients’ use of the Internet and their consultations with their physicians. Too often, patients don’t tell their physicians about their Internet use and physicians don’t ask; both suffer due to the erosion of trust and missed educational opportunities. Better patient-physician communication about Internet use is needed to help patients become truly empowered healthcare consumers.

Objectives: Too little attention is paid to improving how patients locate and use health Web sites and communicate about their use of these Web sites with their physicians. The very people who can best help patients, their medical providers, become disconnected from these so-called empowered healthcare consumers, who use the Internet instead of, before, or after consultations with their physicians without it being discussed or integrated into their care. Poor health outcomes can occur when patients have unexpressed concerns arising from the Web sites they have accessed, don’t believe their physician when a diagnosis or treatment plan differs from what they obtained from the Internet, use their doctor for a second opinion without disclosing that they obtained their first online, make poor decisions without or disregarding medical input, or scour the Internet for miracle cures.

Methods: Based on a literature review, extensive evaluations of health Web sites, and interviews with patients and physicians, better health outcomes for patients can be provided through the design of better user experiences, physician education about patient use of the Internet, patient education about effective Internet use, and the integration of Internet use into patient-physician consultations.

Results: While the designers of e-commerce Web sites focus on user experience design to create successful initial and repeat visits, designers of health Web sites often overlook the importance of the user experience. To help healthcare consumers in all aspects of locating and using online health information, health Web sites need to accommodate the range of needs and varying degrees of health literacy of site visitors. Well-established user experience design techniques can facilitate this, namely the use of personas, competitive analysis, and formative evaluation at all stages of design and development. Health Web sites can also incorporate guidelines about when and how to communicate with healthcare professionals about the information on the Web site.

Physicians need to have a better understanding of the extent to which and the reasons their patients are online before, and will likely go online after, a consultation. Currently, physicians rarely ask patients about their use of the health Web sites or any concerns that they have as a result, nor do they recommend reliable Web sites to newly diagnosed patients. Many fear the patient who arrives with a ream of printouts or who takes over a consultation. But worse than that is when patients have unexpressed fears or distrust their diagnoses because of what they accessed online. Physician training about how and when to ask patients can be aided by adding questions about Web sites used and any concerns to the form patients fill out in the waiting room, and physicians can receive guidance about reliable Web sites to recommend to their patients.

When patients go online, they often start at a search engine and rarely determine the source or date of the information they are using. Better patient education is needed on how to discern credible Web sites and health information on the Internet, a skill that is becoming even more important with the wealth of user-generated content, the many erroneous or misleading Web sites that compete for their attention in searches, and the immediacy of access possible from Internet-enabled mobile devices. Furthermore, patients need guidance about how to discuss their Internet use with their physician appropriately, without taking over the consultation or providing conclusions to a physician who is probing for symptoms. Finally, patients need to seek recommendations for Web sites to use when they leave a consultation with unanswered questions.

Conclusions: Patient use of the Internet disconnected from physician care can be detrimental. The benefits of Internet use can accrue with better design, education, and communication. More effective health Web site use can occur through improved design practices, physician and patient education, and patient-physician communication integrating patient Internet use. Better communication can be facilitated by questions on patient forms and guidelines on health Web sites. The next step is testing these hypotheses. The expected outcome is better informed patients whose Internet use is integrated into, rather than disconnected from, their medical care.

I have seen many examples of ephemeral art: the chalk artist whose work will be washed away; the graffiti artist who uses mud instead of spray paint; and the Washington Monument’s face lift with specially designed scaffolding and draping. Ephemeral art is described as being transient and the fleeting, with no physical remnants (other than photographs).

A consultation has an ephemeral nature as well, with the physical remnants being doctor’s notes. Only rarely do patients have access to these, one exception being the OpenNotes© Project at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center which, according to a description, will “evaluate the impact on both patients and physicians of sharing the comments and observations made by physicians after each patient encounter.” Tom Delbanco, MD, anticipates this will improve patient recall and transform the doctor-patient relationship.

This may change what doctors write since they know that patients might read their notes. It may help patients with comprehension and recall, which have been shown to be reduced especially with a new diagnosis, and hopefully with adherence as well. There may be unanticipated results.

Certainly one of the most common ways to increase recall of a consultation is to increase the number of people there. I saw this first-hand as a patient advocate. Some of the responses, in comments and emails, to Why I Became Interested in Health Literacy, suggest ways of capturing a consultation with audio or video. There are clear advantages to this for patients who can then listen as many times as needed following the meeting, although the immediate opportunity to ask questions is lost. But, like a doctor who may write notes differently knowing they are available to the patient, a recording can change the nature of a consultation.

Knowing that OpenNotes© is new and that the other suggestions might be hard to implement, I asked some colleagues about their experiences with capturing what takes place during a consultation.

Some patients capture the instructions and the keywords. Tania Schlatter, a graphic designer, said her strategy is to “make them write it down for me. For example, my son has allergies and I made an appointment with the RN. She rattled off so much stuff I made her write it down for me. It was a messy scrawl on a bunch of stickies but that’s my reference now.”
 
Gilles Frydman, founder of ACOR.org, said that health literacy skills are no different in France than in the US but that “French doctors all the time record summaries of the conversations” for their patients. He went on to say, “They end up knowing the patients infinitely better than the average US doc using many times more technology. And the French patients are not more health literate than their US counterparts. Good health care is personal; technology should have enhanced that fact, not replaced it.”

Finally, I spoke to Paul S., who said, “The medical people I’ve worked with lately have been pretty good about writing down essential details such as over-the-counter drug names or suggested things to do or not do. Sometimes they have standard handouts that they print off on demand. That said, it would be really interesting to experience the OpenNotes process to compare what I think I got from the conversation with what the practitioner intended to convey. I don’t have the sense that I’ve missed anything from my consultations, but then that’s the point – I wouldn’t know! I have on occasion obtained a physician’s notes about tests or diagnoses, and have wished for someone to interpret the medical jargon. These are notes intended for other medical professionals, so the jargon is appropriate for that purpose. The interpretation of such notes for me might need to be, say, 3 times as many words because I know a fair bit about human biology, but it could easily be 10 or more times as many words for someone with less knowledge. And I know people for whom no amount of interpretation would be enough – they don’t want to understand anything, they just want the bottom line.”

My own recent experience with poison ivy (for the first time) was that my recall was not aided by husband, who had accompanied me to the nurse practitioner, but it helped me when I was frustrated. He repeated to me what she said: “It will get worse before it gets better” and “Nothing will make it go away faster, just reduce the symptoms.” His repetition helped me through a long two weeks.

It’s easy to reflect on the impact of changes: with the demise of Marcus Welby-like home visits, doctors could see more patients but could not see their home environments; and patients were in a much less comfortable environment, possibly impacting their health literacy skills due to the discomfort of being in a waiting room or being in an examining room in a paper gown. With all the technology available for every other aspect of our lives, and for healthcare in particular, there is no technological approach in practice that I know of that captures a consultation. It will be fascinating to see the results of OpenNotes© and mechanisms to give patients more access to health records. While ephemeral art changes the viewer’s reaction, knowing its transient nature, there seem to be few benefits to the ephemeral nature of consultations.

[Note: I just came across Amber J. Tresca's Get the Most from Your Doctor's Appointment, which recommends bringing paper to a doctor's appointment to use for taking notes.]

Much like love and religion, health literacy is a topic that many people have a revelation about. It is not explicitly taught in school (unless you study Health Communication or a related topic); instead people have personal experiences that lead them to learn about health literacy and recognize its importance in all aspects of healthcare.  

My health literacy revelation came while I was a patient advocate for a Cambodian refugee who had cancer. I won’t go into the details of his health condition; just that I took him and his wife to his doctor’s appointments. During the appointments, I encouraged him to talk about his symptoms and medication side effects and asked about test results and treatment options until I understood them. I always made sure the couple were following and checked to see if they had questions.

There are many aspects of patient advocacy I could expand upon, but what struck me the most was how the couple would ask me on the drive home and even weeks later to repeat what the doctor had said. This was information that I retained but they did not. As I started to read about this, I discovered that studies had been done on the emotional impact of disease and how comprehension and retention were impacted.

While language and culture may had been factors, I believe fear had a stronger impact on this couple’s health literacy skills. Now, when I teach, I include health literacy, especially for its role in the design and evaluation of health Web sites. When someone goes to a health Web site, poor health literacy skills can influence the search terms used, the Web sites selected, and how information is used.

Seven years ago, at the age of forty-six, I developed chest pains, strong enough to make me sit on the floor. With three young children asleep upstairs, I was immediately worried about whether they would grow up fatherless. I entered my symptoms into WebMD and learned enough to know I needed to call 911. Five hours later I was released from the ER – no heart attack. Since no one suggested otherwise, I left the hospital and quickly went about living life as though the entire process was nothing more than an overactive imagination.

Six months, many drinks and cigarettes later, and after chopping wood for several hours, I had difficulty breathing during an episode of the Sopranos. The first ride in the ambulance was expensive, and I didn’t want to waste the money for another Chicken Little “The sky is falling” moment of panic.

This time I did not even bother to look up my symptoms. What to do? I went outside and had a cigarette. Embarrassed by my prior “misdiagnosis”, I was reluctant to tell anyone about the fact that I felt like I was breathing through a straw pockmarked with holes. My wife called 911 when I collapsed at her feet.

This time there was no mistake. I’d had a heart attack – been there, done that, got the stent. What we learned was that I’m someone whose enzyme markers don’t appear until after about six hours, my episode earlier that year may have also been an attack, and my interpretation of the symptoms I read on WebMD may have been right. I also learned a few years later via NPR that depression often follows a heart attack and stays with you. It’s a relief to have stumbled across that information, something I wish I’d learned at the time.

What I also figured out on my own through common sense, research, exercise, and changes in lifestyle, and what was subsequently patiently and repeatedly reinforced by a brilliant and kind cardiologist at Penn is that it’s never a good idea to take twenty-five years off between workouts. I also learned that I have and will continue to have heart disease and need to treat it as such. Instead of smoking and drinking, I now run about five miles a day, watch what I eat and when I eat, and am constantly trying to find relevant literature. My doctor tells me I have become his poster child for how to proactively manage heart disease. My guess is that I can outrun and out lift most thirty-year-olds. While there’s no guarantee that I will live longer as the result of my lifestyle changes, I will live better. (P.R., personal correspondence, August 29, 2009.)

WebMD.com is often listed as the most popular health Web site. I find their design is too busy and their content varies considerably in quality. Every time I look at WebMD for a specific purpose, I am distracted by the ads, such as a video advertisement playing next to the text I am reading – how distracting is that? Sometimes I am there for a specific purpose and find myself clicking on the slide show or provocatively-titled articles – did someone say stickiness?

Some of their content deserves an “A”. In an analysis, their Swine Flu Guide was superior to the CDC’s and other sites at providing answers to the questions likely to be on healthcare consumer’s minds.

Other content is less impressive. The most recent article that I read when I was at WebMD for a different purpose was the irresistibly-titled guide to never feeling tired again. I was surprised that the guide, subtitled “22 ways to tackle life’s biggest energy zappers”, was from Redbook Magazine since I thought WebMD wrote their own content. The first page of the four-page article was about how to “Energize Your Diet”. It recommended that I eat breakfast to feel perkier, stay hydrated, etc. While I questioned is I wanted to feel perkier, most of the advice seemed reasonable.

I had just finished teaching a course and asked one my students, Alicia Romano, a master’s candidate in the Friedman Nutrition School at Tufts University School of Medicine and a Dietetic Intern at the Frances Stern Nutrition Center, for her opinion on the article. She responded,

As far as the nutrition related pieces are concerned (generally the first page of the article) the information is pretty accurate in terms of increasing your energy throughout the day (keeping your blood sugars stable and staying hydrated).  I haven’t read much related to the omega-3’s and increasing your energy, so that was interesting.  As far as the other information was concerned, it sounded a little “fluffy” to me, to be honest.  I think all of the tips are good, but overall, I think getting enough sleep, staying hydrated, exercising, and eating healthy and frequently throughout the day are the major keys to energy.  I was not too happy to see that they reviewed some of the new “products” at the end.  I have never even heard of half of those, and I’m sure most readers haven’t either.  If anything they are going to be informing readers of these products that they shouldn’t even try.  Their reviews weren’t on the efficacy either, just a simple quotation. I think the title is a little deceiving as well, but then again, it is from a magazine (Redbook).  I was actually surprised to see they would post a magazine article on WebMD (Personal correspondence, A.R, August 11, 2009).

I appreciate Alicia’s assessment and, based on her analysis and mine, I give the article a “C”. Some good suggestions but only a few references, no links, an introduction with only the merest hint of the content, and no conclusions or resources for further exploration. While WebMD provides many mechanisms to share an article, there are none to comment on or rate the accuracy or usefulness of an article so neither Alicia or I could post our feedback. I looked for the original Redbook article and found that while it seemed essentially the same, although split onto more pages, the links to useful sites such as the American Dietetic Association (ADA) were removed in the WebMD version. Can I lower the “C” to a “C-”?

My friend Jan, a breast cancer survivor, told me about her use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) Web sites and how she has developed a “wackiness filter” to determine which to pursue beyond an initial glance. Interested in learning if wackiness filters are common, I posted a question in twitter about what are the attributes of a Web site that makes you convinced it is “wacky” and what are the warning signals to you? I further asked if this was more of an issue with CAM.

I heard from S.R., who said, “I am in good health and have never had any health challenges. So, I am not sure how useful my strategy is. It’s all talk until then, no?” She looks for “wellness as opposed to disease.” Two of her strategies are reading books before going online and using the resources provided by graduate programs in CAM.

I am fairly receptive to alternative therapies. Being half (East) Indian helps me appreciate them more easily perhaps. But I have a strong Western bias for controlled studies and scientific evidence.

Favourite med resource is internet, but it is just one of the tools. I use my GP to confirm or point me in another direction. Hardly ever rely on her exclusively any more (she is overworked). I also have an old CPS (drug directory) — paper copy. I ask all my friends for their experiences, especially a friend of mine who is a Buddhist and extraordinarily accepting.

I don’t have the skill to understand random control studies; but tend to be cynical b/c of how they are funded. This means I tend to rely on people who interpret them for me like T. Colin Campbell (author of China Study). He is an especially good source because he too tries to integrate east and west, with a western sensibility.

Strategy is always to rely on corroboration – triangulation, isn’t that what researcher’s call it?

If a pharmaceutical company funds a resource, I am ten times more skeptical, with good reason.

For alternative therapies, I tend to read books first, then go to the web from there. Maybe the slower reading, and complete thoughts help me understand where I would be hesitant online. Alternative medicine does not spring from nowhere, and it is not difficult to figure out who is flaky and who speaks with authority borne from wisdom (unlike western medicine, imho). I often email authors; I love living in a world where this is possible.

I have looked at graduate programs in alternative medicine. They understand the western mind and what it takes to reassure (if only to get funding!). I have followed their resource links in the past, and liked what I found.

I never use Google to search for symptoms. The results are a mess.

My undergrad degree is in Biochemistry, and I am in the health care industry. So I am not uncomfortable with the lingo.

I try to pay a lot of attention to my pain signals from my body. I am not great at this, but I’m learning. (Personal correspondence, S.R., May 10, 2009)

Pam Ressler, RN, BSN, HN-BC, and I discussed how healthcare professionals, family, and friends use empathy vs. sympathy to respond to someone who is ill when I told her about my blog post. Pam had insights based on both professional and personal experiences. She told me about Empathy vs. Emotional Reasoning in Nursing, in Advance for Nurses, which Pam posted a blog entry about. The article defines empathy and emotional reasoning as:

Empathy is defined as the ability to understand another person’s circumstances, point of view, thoughts and feelings. When experiencing empathy, one should be able to understand someone else’s internal experiences.

Emotional reasoning is defined as ‘a cognitive error whereby a person who is nervous or anxious resorts to emotional reactions to determine a course of action.’

The article advises “empathy without communication is mind reading. Listen to patients; provide education, but don’t give advice.”

Pam also mentioned a study about doctors and empathic communication that “sheds light on the types of situations and remarks that physicians should recognize as opportunities to express understanding and support… empathic responses can be brief and do not make consultations longer.”

I had a great discussion today with a colleague about her insights on What’s the Right Thing to Say to Someone Who Is Ill? based on her professional and personal experiences. She validated my ideas and inspired me to take them in new directions. It also reminded me why I like to blog.  Recently I was a featured faculty blogger on the Tufts University home page and said, “As an academic, you have endless ideas but you don’t always have the time to pursue them. What I find the blog is great for is taking some of those ideas, fleshing them out, and posting them… Not only are they are there to go back to when time allows, but I get feedback from people who read my blog and write comments.”

When I ran into Paul S. not knowing he had cancer, I barely recognized him and struggled with what to say. “What happened?” didn’t seem appropriate, although it was my initial reaction. I believe I said, “I barely recognized you,” which was true. I’ve been in many situations where I wasn’t sure what to say to someone who was ill or in distress; I wanted to be supportive but wasn’t sure what would be perceived as helpful.

I’ve been on the receiving end too; most recently when my father died and I remembering saying to myself many times, “I know he/she means well” when their words did not comfort me. I only once curtailed a conversation, when, within minutes after hearing about his death, a friend started telling me a long, involved story about a mutual friend’s father. I stopped her, said that I knew she meant to be supportive but I could not listen right now, and walked away.

People so often mean well but don’t know what to say. I asked Paul S. what he found helpful and he thought it was very dependent on personality. He describes himself as “a very logical, rational, controlled-emotions kind of person, so I hear comments such as you made as empathetic or at worst neutral. ‘Wow, Paul, you look like crap!’ ‘Darn right – I feel like crap.’ I actually like that.  But I have known other people who are really bothered by exactly that type of observation. They want sympathy and understanding, but not observation, if you get my distinction. A worried LOOK, and an inquiry about how they are feeling, seems to be what they need. Which I value too. So I guess that’s the safe thing to do.”

When I told Paul about my experience with the friend who I walked away from, he understood my reaction and said, “What I did not want to hear is what you heard: somebody else’s story, not really relevant, and depressing. That’s indicative of a person who isn’t able to listen.” Of course, I was the one who was actually there and don’t think that the person couldn’t listen, but didn’t know what to say and felt moved to say something. The opportunities for mismatch between what one person says and the other person needs are abundant!

The difficulties are compounded by the distinction between advice and information, as Paul articulated, “The other thing I did not want to hear is advice about what I should do or not do – I’m getting the best care available, and I’m pretty competent to take care of myself. But then unsolicited advice is almost never welcome, right? What I DID appreciate, however, was INFORMATION. I didn’t include this in my story, but when I shared my situation with a friend at church, he reported that his mother had experienced something similar and had done extensive research on the web regarding Cisplatin and hearing loss. At my request, he contacted his mother who then e-mailed me several specific web links to good information sites. THAT interaction spurred me to do more research than I had done before.”

When I ran into Paul, my immediate thought was not to offer meals or rides, but sometimes this is the most helpful thing one can say. Paul agrees,”The other thing that was nice, though I didn’t really need it, was offers of help, such as rides to chemo or offers to bring food or visit. I think it’s my personal style to not want or need much of that – I was able to drive the whole time, and didn’t want to put somebody to a lot of trouble; my taste buds and my appetite were shot, plus my partner was taking care of my food needs; and I just wanted to be left alone to vegetate in front of the TV when I felt bad, and not feel like I needed to keep up a conversation or be nice. But I’ve known other people – my (now former) partner is one – who in a similar situation would want almost around-theclock company and help. So it’s good to ask and offer help, as long as you’re prepared to accept ‘thanks, but no thanks’.”

While Paul doesn’t think he is typical, it may be that no one really is in times of need. Which, of course, helps one to appreciate the people who do say or offer exactly what you need at that moment.
Paul also deal with the the common problem of how to keep people informed through email, which is a way of reaching out to people as well and a way of avoiding having the same conversation repeatedly. Paul recounted his experience, “On a closely related topic, something I did that had a surprising and wonderful result: When I entered the hospital, I did a broadcast e-mail to a ton of friends, advising them of the immediate situation and inviting them to opt in to periodic e-mail updates. More than 60 people opted in! Sending those broadcasts helped me feel connected, and I often got lots of replies. But the most surprising thing that kept happening was that they THANKED me for keeping them posted. That blew me away. It still does a year later. True friends WANT to know, want to share the burden. Too many people feel ashamed or embarrassed or unimportant, and they miss this incredible opportunity to strengthen relationships by sharing their situations. Sure, there are folks who complain too much, so it can go the wrong way. My messages were factual and hopeful, even when I felt like crap, and that seemed to inspire a lot of people, which in turn made me feel that something good was coming out of this not-so-good time. I don’t know whether this fits into what you’re trying to do, but I would sure encourage people who find themselves in similar situations to reach out and stay in touch.” There are Web sites for exactly this purpose, but email is certainly simple and, in this case, effective. There are also many people who blog their illness; one of the most moving that I read was NPR journalist Leroy Siever’s My Cancer.

In How useful are online health quizzes? Consumer Reports Health.org, June 2009, I say, “My biggest objection to [quizzes] is how they can be misused.” I go on to say that “Many people who take such quizzes do not necessarily know how to put the test and results in perspective.” Of course they can be fun too, but many are dealing with serious issues in a frivolous way and are not effective screening tools.

Have you ever taken one and with what result?