Abstract:Internet-based secure communication portals (portal) have the potential to enhance patient care via improved patient-provider communications. This study examines differences among primary care patients' perceptions when contemplating using, enrolling to use, and using a portal for health care purposes. A total of 3 groups of patients from 1 Midwestern academic medical center were surveyed at different points in time: (1) Waiting Room survey asking about hypothetical interest in using a portal to communicate wi… Show more
Online access to medical records and linked services, including requesting repeat prescriptions and booking appointments, enables patients to personalize their access to care. However, online access creates opportunities and challenges for both health professionals and their patients, in practices and in research. The challenges for practice are the impact of online services on workload and the quality and safety of health care. Health professionals are concerned about the impact on workload, especially from email or other online enquiry systems, as well as risks to privacy. Patients report how online access provides a convenient means through which to access their health provider and may offer greater satisfaction if they get a timely response from a clinician. Online access and services may also result in unforeseen consequences and may change the nature of the patient-clinician interaction. Research challenges include: (1) Ensuring privacy, including how to control inappropriate carer and guardian access to medical records; (2) Whether online access to records improves patient safety and health outcomes; (3) Whether record access increases disparities across social classes and between genders; and (4) Improving efficiency. The challenges for practice are: (1) How to incorporate online access into clinical workflow; (2) The need for a business model to fund the additional time taken. Creating a sustainable business model for a safe, private, informative, more equitable online service is needed if online access to records is to be provided outside of pay-for-service systems.
Online access to medical records and linked services, including requesting repeat prescriptions and booking appointments, enables patients to personalize their access to care. However, online access creates opportunities and challenges for both health professionals and their patients, in practices and in research. The challenges for practice are the impact of online services on workload and the quality and safety of health care. Health professionals are concerned about the impact on workload, especially from email or other online enquiry systems, as well as risks to privacy. Patients report how online access provides a convenient means through which to access their health provider and may offer greater satisfaction if they get a timely response from a clinician. Online access and services may also result in unforeseen consequences and may change the nature of the patient-clinician interaction. Research challenges include: (1) Ensuring privacy, including how to control inappropriate carer and guardian access to medical records; (2) Whether online access to records improves patient safety and health outcomes; (3) Whether record access increases disparities across social classes and between genders; and (4) Improving efficiency. The challenges for practice are: (1) How to incorporate online access into clinical workflow; (2) The need for a business model to fund the additional time taken. Creating a sustainable business model for a safe, private, informative, more equitable online service is needed if online access to records is to be provided outside of pay-for-service systems.
“…One explanation is that patients who are accustomed to more powerful information tools in other aspects of life may expect greater functionality than merely seeing their information 49 50. Indeed, participants in this study wanted much more—including links to personalised recommendations, and resources and tools to help make information actionable to improve health, as provided by this IPHR.…”
ObjectiveTo assess factors related to use and non-use of a sophisticated interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to promote uptake of 18 recommended clinical preventive services; little is known about how patients want to use or be engaged by such advanced information tools.DesignDescriptive and interpretive qualitative analysis of transcripts and field notes from focus groups of the IPHR users and of patients who were invited but did not use the IPHR (non-users). Grounded theory techniques were then applied via an editing approach for key emergent themes.SettingPrimary care patients in eight practices of the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN).ParticipantsThree focus groups involved a total of 14 IPHR users and two groups of non-users totalled 14 participants.Outcomes/resultsFor themes identified (relevance, trust and functionality) participants indicated that endorsement and use of the IPHR by their personal clinician was vital. In particular, participants’ comments linked the IPHR use to: (1) integrating the IPHR into current care, (2) promoting effective patient–clinician encounters and communication and (3) their confidence in the accuracy, security and privacy of the information.ConclusionsIn addition to patients’ stated desires for advanced functionality and information accuracy and privacy, successful adoption of the IPHRs by primary care patients depends on such technology's relevance, and on its promotion via integration with primary care practices’ processes and the patient–clinician relationship. Accordingly, models of technological success and adoption, when applied to primary care, may need to include the patient–clinician relationship and practice workflow. These findings are important for healthcare providers, the information technology industry and policymakers who share an interest in encouraging patients to use personal health records.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00589173
“…Another potential limitation is the lack of userreported data concerning satisfaction and ease of use of the web-based tool. Future revisions will include questions addressing satisfaction and ease of use so that we can revise our application based on user input (24).…”
Most centers utilize phone or written surveys to screen candidates who self-refer to be living kidney donors. To increase efficiency and reduce resource utilization, we developed a web-based application to screen kidney donor candidates. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of this web-based application. Method and time of referral were tabulated and descriptive statistics summarized demographic characteristics. Time series analyses evaluated use over time. Between January 1, 2011 and March 31, 2012, 1200 candidates self-referred to be living kidney donors at our center. Eight hundred one candidates (67%) completed the web-based survey and 399 (33%) completed a phone survey. Thirty-nine percent of donors accessed the application on nights and weekends. Postimplementation of the web-based application, there was a statistically significant increase (p < 0.001) in the number of self-referrals via the web-based application as opposed to telephone contact. Also, there was a significant increase (p = 0.025) in the total number of self-referrals post-implementation from 61 to 116 per month. An interactive web-based application is an effective strategy for the initial screening of donor candidates. The web-based application increased the ability to interface with donors, process them efficiently and ultimately increased donor self-referral at our center.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.