http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?id=1006530&src=article_head_sitesearch
I read this article about "Health Information on the Web" and I got interested with the research findings that from 2003-2008, there was an increase from 52% to 66% of adults looking for health information online. No wonder why all these patients are so well informed before they see their doctors in the clinic, they question the doctor's prescription, and patients get paranoid about the side effects from the medications that they are taking. In my opinion, there are advantages and disadvantages to having more information on the web for patients.
Advantages:
1) Patients could get access to patient teaching materials via WebMD especially when they have diabetes or hypercholesterolemia. Reinforcement with diet and exercise are necessary.
2) Patients are now well informed and they have access to credible sites that will tell them more about their diseases and treatments. Patients can think of questions that they could ask their doctors about their disease
3) Very good opportunity for Marketers to target their customers (patients and physicians) about pharmaceuticals, services and equipments. It's a great opportunity to advertise online.
Disadvantages:
1) There are a lot of websites that are not credible. Patients might be misinformed.
2) Patients might order their medications online from a very unrealiable resource.
3) Patients get paranoid about their disease and they will keep on bugging their doctors for answers.
You could probably think of more advantages and disadvantages. But do you think that information online and marketing or promotion of products via WebMD or other medical websites are helpful for patients?
Monday, September 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
We're living in a world where the customer is becoming more and more informed even before seeking a doctors service. Angie's LIst for example, www.angieslist.com/, now has a section to rate and review doctors and their practices.
On one hand the online searching helps to establish and builds the confidence of the patient's autonomy argument, but on the other too much information can be a dangerous thing and can often to lead to lengthy "discussions" or disagreement as to care with current medical practices.
When I work with children I tell my parents/patients that I know medicine and they know their child, and between the two of us we'll figure out what's wrong and what's working.
In either case, for both physicians and patients what you read always has to be taken with a grain of salt. If you read something that just doesn't fit right with you then, then it's probably not for you.
It really depends on the patient. If he/she is the anxious type, I would rather direct them to a site after a clinic visit than have them read up on it and say they have this or that or with their minds made up already during a visit. Self medicating is always bad especially with a wrong diagnosis. Let's just say... I rather have them read up on the internet after I see them.
I think I am split on the issue. I have friends who have been diagnosed with terminal diseases and have found the Internet to be the best way to research effectively and work with their doctor. The downside is the more savvy internet users are reticent to search for certain topics on the Web given that search engines and ISPs are able to track this research.
People will do anything just to get informations. These days, internet is the fastest information technology that people could acquire. I like this idea.
However, in terms of health problems, it is the responsibility of the doctors, nurses, physcical therapist, & others to reinforce what patient learned.
Every illness has its different approach in treatment whether it is surgical, pharmacological, or
non-pharmacological.
Post a Comment