Cancer Patients benefit from full access to medical records

Cancer Patients who are given full access to their medical record feel a greater sense of satisfaction about their treatment, a new study finds.

French researchers also concluded that provide complete and accurate medical information built of trust between the patient and the physician.

Published online on May 23 in the journal Cancer, the study analyzed 295 patients recently diagnosed cancer Lymphoma, breast or colon cancer. All were treated by chemotherapy.

Patients received either "on request information", or organized medical file (OMR) - a Briefcase complete detailed information on their condition and treatment. These information included reports on all, surgery, radiology and pathology results, with the nurse stories and observations of treatment. With SEO, they received guides on medical terms and understand the material, as well as to help medical personnel to decipher the various documents.

Eighty Eighteen per cent of patients who offered an OMR has chosen to take.

Patients who have received on-demand information has been provided only information and medical records if they asked for them or their doctor offered.

Similar anxiety and quality of life scores levels have been reported in the two groups.

But patients with OMR were 1.68 times more likely to be satisfied with their medical information and were 1.86 times more likely to feel fully informed, the authors of the study noted.

And 70.4% of the patients who received an OMR has said that they would once more to receive, with 74.8% saying: they not regret their choice. In addition, the majority of these patients has been reported that SEO was not the source of any anxiety.

"Information is crucial to make decisions of treatment options, and for the patient and his family, to cope with the disease and its consequences," study author Dr. Gwenaelle Gravis, the Paoli-Calmettes Institute in Marseillesaid in a press release of the editor of the journal. "Full access to his medical file with the possibility to consult only if you want increased patient confidence in the physician and the medical team."

Most cancer patients, such as full access to files

NEW YORK - Cancer patients who were given full access to their medical records at the beginning of the said treatment records helped to understand and discuss their disease with others, and they were not more concerned than other patients in a new study of the France.

There was a tendency to improve patient access to their own health information, some physicians fear that give full records patients will increase their anxiety, the authors note in the journal Cancer.

But Dave deBronkart, a prominent blogger on the participation of the patient since his own recovery from advanced kidney cancer, argues that full access is useful.

deBronkart, who blogs as "e-patient Dave", told Reuters Health via e-mail, "detailed information on the disease are important for the patient to make informed decisions." It also allows the patient and his family to cope better. ?

Participants in the new study included approximately 300 patients who had been recently diagnosed with cancer of the breast, cancer of the colon and lymphoma and started chemotherapy treatment.

Dr. Gwenaelle Gravis of the Paoli-Calmettes Institute in Marseille and colleagues randomly these patients in both groups.

In a group, patients received information in the usual manner for their institution - doctors could give patients their medical records if they chose, and patients may ask to see records on their own. In the other group, all patients who have accepted received their full medical records in a Briefcase with a user guide and were said to carry the Briefcase appointments so that records could be continuously updated.

In the beginning, middle and the end of the treatment, the researchers asked patients about their level of anxiety. Also, they gave participants a survey on quality of life and has asked on their understanding of their disease and treatment experience.

Anxiety levels were not different between the groups at any time during the treatment, and patients in both groups have also reported a quality of life like at the beginning and the end of chemotherapy.

Well that more than patients who received their full medical records saying that they were completely satisfied with the information they received and feel fully informed, this trend was not passed statistical tests to show a difference between groups.

The majority of patients who have received their complete medical record, said that the records helped to understand their disease in more detail and discuss with family members and physicians.

About 70 per cent of them said that if they had the choice to go back, they would receive their full file again.

Some patients complained that Briefcase with their records was too heavy to carry, or that its color was"inadequate", and a few others, has stated that they had insufficient information, or that it is difficult to organize the information that was there.

Gravis and his colleagues noted that giving patients a full access to their medical records could help foster confidence in their doctors in the long term, and it was easy to do.

deBronkart says he is "sick of people being in the institution, regardless of what say patients we want, think it is in our own interest if they make that decision for us."

"There is evidence that the majority of patients with cancer would like to receive as much information as possible", he added.

The authors cautioned that most of the patients had stage cancer with a good prognosis, and the results may not apply to patients of different types of cancer.

Peter Schmidt, Chief Information Officer at the National Foundation of Parkinson, who was not involved in the study, said it may also be useful for patients to have access to an "Adviser to medical records", because some files may have confusion of information.

Researchers have said that a study is needed on the responses of patients to access medical documented in other situations and circumstances - including in the context of electronic medical records, which could allow easy patientsconfidential access to the House.

They concluded that in this study at least, "allowing full access to the folders medical personal satisfaction increased without increasing anxiety in patients with newly diagnosed cancer.".

Study of the rural challenges lack of access to surgery

CHICAGO - a surprising study of nearly 46 million patients said Medicare older residents in rural areas are more likely to have one of the nine common surgeries that people in the cities.

Back surgery, hip and knee replacement and removal of the prostate have been among the transactions more often rural Medicare patients, the study found. Emergency surgery and elective operations both were more frequent for residents of rural areas.

The results seem to challenge the idea that urban dwellers have better access to medical care, but experts say that the research raises more questions than it answers.

"When I saw first the result, I looked at and said perhaps that I got it back," said senior author Dr. Mark Francis, researcher at the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center at El Paso. The study does not indicate where rural residents had surgery. It is likely that many had to travel some distance, which could be risky during urgent surgery is necessary.

The study did not report on how patients fared after their operations. Neither it said if the residents of rural areas had worse health overall that the inhabitants of the city, although some previous research suggested, this is true in General.

The authors say that their findings could mean that rural residents are more sick, if they have, treatment or more likely to delay the treatment of pain until they worsen and require surgery.

It is also possible residents of rural areas have less access to non-surgical treatments or consider as less desirable. But the real reason cannot be drawn from the study, which was an analysis of data on all patients to Medicare in 2006.

Although cases are five years old Francis said that the likely results of reflect current practice and noted that he had found similar trends, dating back to the 1990s. He said, it is unlikely that the recession had much impact because these patients are covered by health insurance.

Researchers used the ZIP codes and a system of classification of government areas on a scale of 10 points, with 1 being the most urban and 10 of the rural. They have compared rates of surgery for residents of 7 to 10 - rural - regions with most urban areas.

The study was published Monday in the Archives of surgery.

Francis said colleagues told him: "If you find a difference of 5 per cent, which would be a big difference to a view of public health policy." But the contrast between the two groups was great for all but one of operations - like abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Residents of rural areas were almost 20% more likely to have replacement heart valve and approximately 15 percent more likely to obtain replacements of the knee or hip or spine fusion surgery. Smaller, but still note differences were found for the surgery of the prostate, appendectomy, surgery to remove blockages of the neck artery and surgery to correct the broken hips.

A critique of Archives, said the study raises some difficult questions.

"We have been led to believe that patients in rural areas do not have appropriate access to the surgery." "Although this may be true for specific areas, it seems to be the case of the nation, as a whole" surgeon Massachusetts General Hospital, Dr. George Velmahos wrote.

Dr. Sam Finlayson, a Dartmouth Medical School surgeon and researcher, called the results provocative but said, "I do not think that this study can destroy all the evidence that there are pockets of problems related to access to surgical care throughout rural America".

Other research has suggested that there is a growing shortage of surgeons in rural America. But Keith Mueller, a specialist in rural health at the University of Iowa, said that the new study raises the "so what?" If the people lacking local access can get surgery elsewhere. Despite this, he said, it may be more appropriate to have more of these services locally.