P22S04: Raynaud’s phenomenon
Bottom line: Information on Raynaud’s phenomenon was used to maintain the management of a patient (pursue
same medication). There were no
information-related patient health outcomes.
Level 1 outcome (situational relevance): On March 25, 2009, P22 did a search at work, by themselves, and after
an encounter with 2 patients (2 different patients with Raynaud). They
retrieved one information hit about Raynaud’s phenomenon. The reported search objective was: to
search in general or for curiosity. “The idea [of this search] was curiosity, because I had two patients with
Raynaud [...] in the past month or previous two weeks [two women: a 38 year-old
and a 50 year-old]. I [had] treated them a certain way and I was curious [to
know] what [e-Therapeutics+ suggested].” According to P22,
e-Therapeutics+ was the only source for information, and the found information
was relevant.
Level 2 outcome (cognitive impact): One hit was associated with a report of positive cognitive impact (see table). Regarding
practice improvement, P22 stated: “It’s because I didn’t know about a certain
medication [that was described in e-Therapeutics+]. I always used calcium
channel blockers but I forgot or I didn’t [know] [...] another medication that
was used. [e-Therapeutics+] gave me something else so I [now] have many
treatment options.”
Retrieved
information hit:
1) e-Therapeutics+ (CIRT): e-Therapeutics Tab – Home – Click here for more –Highlight + whole page about Raynaud’s
phenomenon (P22S04H01)
Level 3 outcome
(information use): Information on Raynaud’s phenomenon was retrieved, and used to better understand a
specific issue with respect to the management of the patient, and to maintain (be more certain about) the management of a patient (information used as presented in e-Therapeutics+). “The decision had already been made. [...] I
decided to increase the dose, not to change medication. [...] I will see them
[patients] again for follow-up [...] [and] possibly that on the next visit
[...], if what we gave didn’t work, I will add the other medication for a
change.”
Level 4 outcome (patient health): Without these
information hits, P22’s management of the patient would have been the same.
There was no clear relationship between the information use and patient health
outcomes.
Levels of outcome of information-seeking
|
Situational relevance |
Positive cognitive
impact |
Information use |
Patient health |
|
Satisfy curiosity |
Practice improved Reminded something Motivated to learn Confirmed Reassured |
Be more certain Understand issue |
No outcome |