The Blue Button Project: Engaging Patients in Healthcare by a Click of a Button

The Blue Button project has become a way for many Americans to download their health records by just a click in any way that suits them, such as in print, on a thumb drive, or on their mobile devices and smartphones. Several organizations have developed and applied Blue Buttons on their websites to allow beneficiaries to securely access and view personal medical information and claims. The purpose of this literature review is to highlight the significance of the Blue Button project in the field of health information management. Findings suggest that the project could empower and engage consumers and patients in a healthcare system by allowing access to medical records, thereby promoting better management and overall improvement of their healthcare. To date, the project has gained wide support from insurers, technology companies, and health providers despite the challenges of standardization and interoperability

A vision for using online portals for surveillance of patient-centered communication in cancer care

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is charged with providing high-quality health care, not only in terms of technical competence but also with regard to patient-centered care experiences. Patient-centered coordination of care and communication are especially important in cancer care, as deficiencies in these areas have been implicated in many cases of delayed cancer diagnosis and treatment. Additionally, because cancer care facilities are concentrated within the VHA system, geographical and system-level barriers may present prominent obstacles to quality care. Systematic assessment of patient-centered communication (PCC) may help identify both individual veterans who are at risk of suboptimal care and opportunities for quality improvement initiatives at the service, facility, or system-wide level. In this manuscript, we describe our vision to implement an assessment of PCC through patient self-report to improve the quality of cancer care and other health services in the VHA. We outline a possible strategy to assess PCC that leverages the VHA’s existing initiative to promote use of an online personal health record for veterans (MyHealtheVet). Questionnaires administered periodically or following specific episodes of care can be targeted to assess PCC in cancer care. Assessment of PCC can also be tied to clinical and administrative data for more robust analysis of patient outcomes. Ultimately, the goal of any assessment of PCC is to gather valid, actionable data that can assist VHA clinicians and staff with providing the best possible care for veterans with cancer

Impact of Patient Access to Online VA Notes on Healthcare Utilization and Clinician Documentation: a Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: In an effort to foster patient engagement, some healthcare systems provide their patients with open notes, enabling them to access their clinical notes online. In January 2013, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) implemented online access to clinical notes ( VA Notes ) through the Blue Button feature of its patient portal. OBJECTIVE: To measure the association of online patient access to clinical notes with changes in healthcare utilization and clinician documentation behaviors. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: Patients accessing My HealtheVet (MHV), the VA\u27s online patient portal, between July 2011 and January 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Use of healthcare services (primary care clinic visits and online electronic secure messaging), and characteristics of physician clinical documentation (readability of notes). KEY RESULTS: Among 882,575 unique portal users, those who accessed clinical notes (16.2%; N = 122,972) were younger, more racially homogenous (white), and less likely to be financially vulnerable. Compared with non-users, Notes users more frequently used the secure messaging feature on the portal (mean of 2.6 messages (SD 7.0) v. 0.87 messages (SD 3.3) in January-July 2013), but their higher use of secure messaging began prior to VA Notes implementation, and thus was not temporally related to the implementation. When comparing clinic visit rates pre- and post-implementation, Notes users had a small but significant increase in rate of 0.36 primary care clinic visits (2012 v. 2013) compared to portal users who did not view their Notes (p = 0.01). At baseline, the mean reading ease of primary care clinical notes was 53.8 (SD 10.1) and did not improve after implementation of VA Notes. CONCLUSIONS: VA Notes users were different than patients with portal access who did not view their notes online, and they had higher rates of healthcare service use prior to and after VA Notes implementation. Opportunities exist to improve clinical note access and readability

Characteristics of patient portals developed in the context of health information exchanges: Early policy effects of incentives in the meaningful use program in the United States

__Background:__ In 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in the United States launched the second stage of its Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program, providing financial incentives to providers to meaningfully use their electronic health records to engage patients online. Patient port

Lack of Diversity in Personal Health Record Evaluations with Older Adult Participants: A Systematic Review of Literature

Background: Older adults are not adopting personal health records (PHRs) at the same rates as other adult populations. Disparities in adoption rates are also reported in older adult subgroups. The variability in adoption may be because PHRs are not designed to meet older adult users.Objective: We analyzed PHR evaluation studies to examine the characteristics and perspectives of older adult study participants to identify their self-reported needs.Method: We searched Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase for PHR evaluation studies that involved older adult participants.Results: 1017 abstracts were identified, and 179 publications went through full text review. 10 publications met inclusion criteria. These publications described studies conducted in 3 countries, and evaluated 7 PHRs. Homogeneity was found in the study populations and participant opinions of the systems.Discussion: Many PHR evaluations do not include diverse older adult participants. This may lead to consistency in outcomes, but it also may create gaps in identifying user needs. Additional studies, specifically targeting diverse older adult participants, are needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the opinions of older adults on PHRs and how these systems could benefit older adult healthcare consumers.Conclusion: The body of research shows that older adults are highly satisfied using PHRs. These outcomes may be generalizable because most PHR evaluation studies do not include diverse older adult participants. This lack of participant diversity may be contributing to the disparities observed in PHR adoption rates