Læknablaðið - 15.11.2008, Side 23

FRÆÐIGREINAR
RANNSÓKNIR
5. Forsætisráðuneyti íslands. Auðlindir í allra þágu. Stefna
ríkisstjómarinnar um upplýsingasamfélagið, 2004-2007;
Skýrsla. Forsætisráðuneyti íslands, Reykjavík 2004. www.
forsaetisraduneyti.is/media/Skyrslur/UpplStefna2004.pdf/
6. Eysenbach G, Jadad AR. Consumer health informatics in the
Intemet age. In Edwards A, Elwyn G, ed. Evidence-based
patient choice Oxford: University Press 2001: 289-307.
7. Teslow MS, Wilde DJ. Data collection standards. In:
Abdelhak M, Grostick S, Hanken MA, Jackobs E, ed. Health
Information: Management of a Strategic Resource. 2nd ed. WB
Saunders Company, Philadelphia 2001: 72-143.
8. Pyper C, Amery J, Watson M, Thomas B, Crook, C. Survey
of patient and primary health care team perceptions and
attitudes on electronic health records. NHS Information
Authority, ERDIP, Electronic Record Development and
Implementation Programme; Report 2001. www.nhsia.nhs.
uk/erdip/pages/demonstrator/bury/bury_(13).pdf/
9. Ross SE, Todd J, Moore LA, Beaty BL, Wittevrongel L, Lin CT.
Expectations of patients and physicians regarding patient-
accessible medical records. J Med Intemet Res 2005; 7: el3.
www.jmir.org/2005/2/el5/
10. Cimino JJ, Patel VL, Kushniruk AW. The patient clinical
information system (PatCIS): technical solutions for and
experience with giving patients access to their electronic
medical records. Int J Med Inform 2002; 68:113-27.
11. Hassol A, Walker JM, Kidder D, et al. Patient experiences
and attitudes about access to a patient electronic health care
record and linked web messaging. J Am Med Inform Assoc
2004; 11(6): 505-13.
12. Pálsdóttir Á. Icelandic citizens' everyday life health
information behaviour. Health Informatics J 2003; 9: 225-40.
13. Essex B, Doig R, Renshaw J. Pilot study of records of shared
care for people with mental illnesses. Br Med J 1990; 300:
1442-6.
14. Sukel K. European countries adopt e-Health interoperability
and cooperation. Healthcare I.T. News EU 2007; Ápril 26th.
healthcareitnews.eu/content/view/404/40/
15. Gann BN. HS direct online: A multi-channel eHealth service.
In: Iakovidis I, Wilson P, Healy JC, ed. E-Health. Current
Situation and Examples of Implemented and Beneficial E-
Health Applications. IOS Press, Amsterdam 2004:164-8.
16. Hagstofa Islands. Notkun heimila og einstaklinga á tölvum
og intemeti 2008. Hagtíðindi. Statistical Series, 2008: 1; 93:
1-12. hagstofan.is/lisalib/getfile.aspx?ItemID=8282/
17. World Economic Forum. The Global Information Technology
Report 2006-2007; Executive summary 2007. www.weforum.
org/pdf/gitr/summary2007.pdf/
18. Gustafson DH, Hawkins RP, Boberg EW, et al. CHESS: 10
years of research and development in consumer health
informatics for broad population, including the undeserved.
Int J Med Inform 2002; 65:169-77.
19. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research. Principles and Methods
7th ed. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia 2004:
428.
20. Ragnarsdóttir Þ, Þórólfsson Þ. Viðskiptavinum spöruð sporin.
UT-blaðið 2007. Forsætisráðuneyti Islands, Reykjavík 2007.
www.utvefur.is/vidburdir/ut-2007/ut-bladid/nr/2630/.
21. Tryggingastofnun ríkisins (TR) (2008). Tryggur. Rafræn
þjónusta TR. www.tr.is/frettir/nr/805/
22. Capacent ráðgjöf. Úttekt á framkvæmd stefnunnar um
upplýsingasamfélagið 2004-2007. Auðlindir í allra þágu
(Skýrsla). Forsætisráðuneytið, Reykjavík 2007 www.
forsaetisraduneyti.is/ media/Skyrslur/Utekt_a_stefnu_-
_upplysingasamfelagid_20122007.pdf/
23. Heimisdóttir M. Faraldsfræði í dag (12).
Sjúklingasamanburðarrannsóknir V. Úrvinnsla gagna og
túlkun niðurstaðna. Læknablaðið 2001; 87: 945.
24. Commission of the European Communities, e-Health
- making healthcare better for European citizens: An action
plans for a European e-Health Area. SEC 2004; 539.
Halldórsdóttir G, Thoroddsen AS
Access to Own Health Information and Services on the Internet by Disability
Pensioners and Other Citizens
Objective: To study lcelandic citizens’ perception,
attitude and preferences regarding access to own health
information and interactive services at the State Social
Security Institute of lceland (SSSI). Hypotheses regarding
differences between disability pensioners and other
citizens were put forward.
Material and methods: A descriptive mail survey was
performed with a random sample from the lcelandic
population, 1.400 individuals, age 16 to 67, divided into
two groups of 700 each: (1) persons entitled to disability
pension (2) other citizens in lceland. The questionnaire
consisted of 56 questions, descriptive statistics were used
and Chi square for comparison with 95% as confidence
level of significance. Response rate was 34.9%.
Results: Perception of rights to access owns’ health
information was significantly higher by pensioners than
other citizens. Attitude concerning impact of access was in
general positive, with pensioners significantly more positive
about effectiveness, perception of health, communication
and decisions owing to services, access at SSSI,
maintaining health records and controlling access.
Conclusions: The study, the first of its kind in lceland,
supports previous research. The results, as well as foreign
models of research projects, are recommended to be used
for evolution of electronic health services and researching
employees’ viewpoints. Future research in lceland should
address the impact of interactive health communication on
quality of life, health and sen/ices’ efficiency.
Keywords: access, health information, health informatics, health consumer, internet service.
Correspondence: Gyða Halldórsdóttir. gyda@heilsunet.is
>
cc
<
s
5
D
W
I
w
o
z
lii
Barst: 12. júní 2008, - samþykkt til birtingar: 2. október 2008. #
LÆKNAblaöið 2008/94 735