MTV, sundhedstjenesteforskning og klinisk praksis

via the Internet, many patients report considerable difficulties in
obtaining relevant information (7). There are various reasons for
this. Health professionals frequently underestimate patients’ desire
for and ability to cope with information. Consultation times are
limited – there is often insufficient time to explain fully the condition
and the treatment choices, and health professionals may themselves
lack knowledge of treatment options and their effects. It is
hard for patients to find their way through the morass of information
sources and to decide which contain reliable information and
which should be ignored. A solution to these problems is to provide
patients with quality-assured written or audiovisual material, to inform
themselves and to use in discussion with health professionals.
Information for patients has been produced in a variety of media,
including leaflets or booklets, audiotapes for use at home or accessible
via a telephone line, videos, and Web sites. Publishers of these
materials include consumer groups, professional and academic organisations,
health care purchasers and providers, pharmaceutical
companies, equipment manufacturers and other commercial organisations.
Recent studies have found that many of the health Web
sites on the Internet contain unreliable information (8, 9). We carried
out a study to evaluate more conventional patient information
sources including leaflets, audiotapes and videos. We organised reviews
of the materials by patients and academic specialists using systematic
reviews of clinical research evidence and patients’ descriptions
of their information needs as the yardstick against which to
judge their quality and reliability. This revealed considerable cause
for concern about the content of patient information materials.
Many contained inaccurate, incomplete or out-of-date information,
which was over-optimistic about the benefits of medical treatment.
Risks and side-effects were often not mentioned and uncertainties
were ignored or glossed over. Patients felt the language and tone of
many of the materials was inappropriately prescriptive and patronising.
On the basis of this study we have published a quality
checklist for the development of patient information materials (10).
Interest in shared decision-making and awareness of the limitations
of existing information sources has prompted the development
of evidence-based decision aids for patients. These take a variety of
forms, including leaflets, audiotapes, structured interviews, decision
boards, computer programmes, videos and interactive videos,
28