Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

E-mail and oncology: a survey of radiation oncology patients and their attitudes to a new generation of health communication

  • Paper
  • Published:
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases Submit manuscript

Abstract

Electronic mail (e-mail) is a powerful tool that can greatly enhance communication and has numerous potential applications within the medical profession. Physician–patient e-mail communication volume is increasing, but little research has addressed patient interests and concerns about this now commonplace technology. The goals of this study were to review the available literature regarding physician–patient e-mail practices, evaluate patient interest, assess patient perspectives about how e-mail communication might facilitate medical treatment and advice, and determine areas of patient concern regarding e-mail communication with their physicians. To this end, a population of cancer patients was sent a written survey designed to assess their access to e-mail and attitudes about physician–patient e-mail communication. We found that patients favored e-mail for increased convenience, efficiency, and timeliness about general health problems, while it was not favored for urgent matters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kane B, Sands D . Guidelines for the clinical use of electronic mail with patients. J Am Med Inf Assoc 1998; 5: 104–111.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kleiner K, Akers R, Burke B, Werner E . Parent and physician attitudes regarding electronic communication in pediatric practices. Pediatrics 2002; 109: 740–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fridsma D, Ford P, Altman R . A survey of patient access to electronic mail: attitudes, barriers, and opportunities. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1994, 15–19.

  4. Mandl K, Kohane I, Brandt A . Electronic patient–physician communication: Problems and promise. Ann Int Med 1998; 129: 495–500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bitter J . E-mail in medical practice: legal and ethical concerns. QRC Advisor 2000; 16: 1–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Spielberg A . On call and online: sociohistorical, legal, and ethical implications of e-mail for the patient–physician relationship. JAMA 1998; 280: 1353–1359.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoffman A . Take 2, and e-mail me in the morning: doctors consult patients electronically. New York Times-Cyber Times; June 3, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Allert S, Adelhard K, Boettcher F, Schweiberer L . Communication in plastic surgery by means of e-mail: experiences and recommendations for clinical use. Plastic & Reconst Surg 2000; 106: 660–664.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Neinstein L . Utilization of electronic communication (E-mail) with patients at university and college health centers. J Adolesc Health 2000; 27: 6–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ferguson T . Health care in cyberspace: patients lead the revolution. Futurist 1997; 31: 29.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Neill R, Mainous A, Clark J, Hagen M . The utility of electronic mail as a medium for patient-physician communication. Arch Fam Med 1994; 3: 268–271.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Prady S, Norris D, Lester J, Hoch D . Expanding the guidelines for electronic communication with patients: application to a specific tool. J Am Med Inf Assoc 2001; 8: 344–348.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Albert T . Take care with patient e-mail policies. American Medical News (http://www.amednews.com/2001/prsc0122), January 22, 2001.

  14. Rivest R, Shamir A, Adleman L . A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Commun Assoc Comput Mach 1978; 21: 120–126.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Andreae M . Confidentiality in medical telecommunication. The Lancet 1996; 347: 487–488.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Computer Industry Almanac Inc. USA tops 160M Internet Users. http://www.c-i-a.com/pr1202.htm.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Kimmel Cancer Center, Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA

    C Katzen, M J Solan & A P Dicker

Authors
  1. C Katzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M J Solan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A P Dicker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A P Dicker.

Additional information

This work was presented at the ASTRO 2002 Annual Meeting.

This work was supported in part by P30 CA 56036-03 (NCI).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Katzen, C., Solan, M. & Dicker, A. E-mail and oncology: a survey of radiation oncology patients and their attitudes to a new generation of health communication. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 8, 189–193 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500797

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500797

  • Springer Nature Limited

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation