Evaluating World Wide Web-based foot care information

Introduction

The NH is encouraging individuals to be increasingly proactive in their healthcare, promoting the Internet as a source of patient information (Department of Health and NH Executive, 1998) As the Internet is increasingly used by the agency of patients, it is important to make secure that individuals source relevant and good-quality information, which is easily accessible [i]or[/i] part of to the other UK-focused consumer health websites. This article describes a inquiry undertaken to assess the quality of Internet-based information upon foot care available to clan with diabetes in the UK

lock opener WORDS

* Internet

* Information appraisal

* Self-management

* Patient education

**********

Given the possible issues of peripheral ischaemia and neuropathy associated with diabetes, the care of individuals with the condition is individual of the most important areas of podiatric practice. These issues combined with high foot squeezings self-treatment or both, can lead to morbidity and mortality, with lower extremity ulceration the most common manifestation of diabetic neuropathy, and diabetes being the next to the first commonest cause of lower limb amputation (Department of Health [DoH], 2001) Guidelines for diabetes care have cited health education as essential to debar and minimise foot pathology, and lower extremity care education is promoted as an important part of managing diabetic paw disease (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network [SIGN], 2001) For podiatrists, as for other health professionals, health education constitutes a large part of practice with regard to the high-risk patient, of the like kind as those with diabetes (Cooper et al, 2003)

Traditionally, within the medical type of health care, the health professional gripe [i]or[/i] grips the role of educator, and health education has been delivered upon a face-to-face basis, usually verbally or with printed material. Historically, the health professional has been the giver of this necessary information and the patient has only been the vessel to receive it (Muir Gray, 2002) In the 20th hundred the clinician held the resources, and the patient simply had to be patient (Coulter 2002) It is now recognised that the 21st hundred patient needs and desires knowledge about his or her condition and its management, and increasingly uses his or her have a title to resources (e.g. the Internet) to access this (Muir Gray, 2002)

The Internet is a lock opener influence in the changing balance of power and knowledge between the medical professions and the public (Powell and Clarke, 2002) This impel towards patient empowerment and involvement in decision-making has meant that many individuals wish to access information at their possess convenience; the Internet facilitates this (Rhode 2000) The access of Internet information is totally within the ascendency of the individual.

Many doubts remain, however, about quality. The Internet is widely unregulated, and anyone who wishes to can publish information online. While online appraisal tools are available, many lay searchers may not understand the ne for this, and may accept information at face value (Rhode 2000; Powell and Clarke, 2002) They may be unaware of possible information bias, or misleading authorship (Kiley, 2000; Cline and Hayes, 2001)

While Hejlesen et al's inquiry (2001) on using the Internet for patient-centred diabetes care reported that patients oftentimes find it hard to justice quality of information, UK research of Internet use for health information by means of patients from one general practice lay the foundation of that consumers are indeed aware of potential difficulties with interpreting information (Rose et al, 2002) Where they might falter is in knowing what criteria to use to justice health information. Criteria discussed by dint of Silberg et al (1997) remain relevant today, and include authorship (who wrote the content?) copyright (who have a title tos it, and what is its date?), ownership of the website and publicity (is the content current, and when was it last updated?). These criteria form the basis of quality 'kite marks' for health websites, of that kind as the 'HON code' (Health upon the Net Code of Conduct) of the Health upon the Net Foundation (http://www.hon.ch [accessed 23022006]; Figure 1) Evaluated make subordinate catalogues such as Organising Medical Networked Information (OMNI; http://www.omni.ac.uk [accessed 23022006]) and information quality sites similar as Judge: web sites for health (http://www.judgehealth.org.uk [accessed 23022006]) also adhere to these criteria.

Silberg et al's (1997) maxim 'caveant lector et viewor--let the reader and viewer beware' is as sensible a caution today as it at any time was, and should be remembered by means of all who seek health information upon the Internet.

We undertook a small application of mind funded by Queen Margaret University guild Edinburgh, with the specific objective of evaluating the diabetes lower extremity care advice of UK-focused consumer health websites against a 'gold standard': Taking care of your feet (Diabetes UK 2000) The information in this leaflet was condens and itemised to give a possible maximum score of 23 and the easy in mind of web pages was compared against this.