Understanding patient-provider communication entered via a patient portal system

ABSTRACT Our study examines patient-provider communication via a patient portal in a large medical center. Our study is based on 1172 interactions made among stakeholders concerning 100 patients who are randomly selected from the 2009 MyHealthAtVanderbilt.com (a patient portal at the Vanderbilt Medical Center) patient pool; among which, 35 use the patient portal for messages. The findings show a wide range of topics discussed and ways in which patients provide and seek information as well as express psychosocial and emotional needs. In addition, while the patient portal has advantages over traditional communication technologies, it was not the primary communication media for our study sample. More research is needed to better elucidate barriers to the use of patient portals and the optimal methods of communication in differing contexts

Using the Electronic Patient Portal to Engage Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions

Three in four Americans aged 65 and older is living with multiple chronic conditions. These patients have complex care needs and stand to benefit from tools facilitating engagement in their healthcare. Little is known regarding use of the electronic patient portal as a tool to support self-care in patients with multiple chronic conditions. The purpose of this multiple-methods study was to (1) explore characteristics and patterns of portal use by patients with multiple chronic conditions and (2) to understand the perceived usefulness of this tool to improve self-care. In phase 1, the quantitative phase, data from electronic health records and web server log files were analyzed. Patients (n=500) who were 45 years or older, registered portal users, and diagnosed with at least two chronic conditions were included in the analysis. No significant differences in portal use were found according to demographic characteristics, distance separating the patient from their primary care provider, and practice size and location. There was a significant difference between patients who accessed the portal to send a message to the provider and patient entered data in regards to logins (p\u3c .001 and p=.03). In phase 2, the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews with patients (n=9) and providers (n=7) were conducted to understand how patients learn about the portal and their perceptions of usefulness for improving self-care in patients with multiple chronic conditions. Twelve categories related to four broad themes: 1) how patients are introduced to the EPP, 2) perceived benefits of the EPP, 3) perceived barriers to using the EPP, and 4) perceptions of using EPP for self-management of chronic illness were revealed. Implications for further research, policy, and practice are presented

E-infrastructures fostering multi-centre collaborative research into the intensive care management of patients with brain injury

Clinical research is becoming ever more collaborative with multi-centre trials now a common practice. With this in mind, never has it been more important to have secure access to data and, in so doing, tackle the challenges of inter-organisational data access and usage. This is especially the case for research conducted within the brain injury domain due to the complicated multi-trauma nature of the disease with its associated complex collation of time-series data of varying resolution and quality. It is now widely accepted that advances in treatment within this group of patients will only be delivered if the technical infrastructures underpinning the collection and validation of multi-centre research data for clinical trials is improved. In recognition of this need, IT-based multi-centre e-Infrastructures such as the Brain Monitoring with Information Technology group (BrainIT - www.brainit.org) and Cooperative Study on Brain Injury Depolarisations (COSBID - www.cosbid.de) have been formed. A serious impediment to the effective implementation of these networks is access to the know-how and experience needed to install, deploy and manage security-oriented middleware systems that provide secure access to distributed hospital based datasets and especially the linkage of these data sets across sites. The recently funded EU framework VII ICT project Advanced Arterial Hypotension Adverse Event prediction through a Novel Bayesian Neural Network (AVERT-IT) is focused upon tackling these challenges. This chapter describes the problems inherent to data collection within the brain injury medical domain, the current IT-based solutions designed to address these problems and how they perform in practice. We outline how the authors have collaborated towards developing Grid solutions to address the major technical issues. Towards this end we describe a prototype solution which ultimately formed the basis for the AVERT-IT project. We describe the design of the underlying Grid infrastructure for AVERT-IT and how it will be used to produce novel approaches to data collection, data validation and clinical trial design is also presented

Email for communicating results of diagnostic medical investigations to patients

<p>Background: As medical care becomes more complex and the ability to test for conditions grows, pressure on healthcare providers to convey increasing volumes of test results to patients is driving investigation of alternative technological solutions for their delivery. This review addresses the use of email for communicating results of diagnostic medical investigations to patients.</p> <p>Objectives: To assess the effects of using email for communicating results of diagnostic medical investigations to patients, compared to SMS/ text messaging, telephone communication or usual care, on outcomes, including harms, for health professionals, patients and caregivers, and health services.</p> <p>Search methods: We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1 2010), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to January 2010), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to January 2010), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1967 to January 2010), CINAHL (EbscoHOST) (1982 to February 2010), and ERIC (CSA) (1965 to January 2010). We searched grey literature: theses/dissertation repositories, trials registers and Google Scholar (searched July 2010). We used additional search methods: examining reference lists and contacting authors.</p> <p>Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies of interventions using email for communicating results of any diagnostic medical investigations to patients, and taking the form of 1) unsecured email 2) secure email or 3) web messaging. All healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers in all settings were considered.</p> <p>Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed the titles and abstracts of retrieved citations. No studies were identified for inclusion. Consequently, no data collection or analysis was possible.</p> <p>Main results: No studies met the inclusion criteria, therefore there are no results to report on the use of email for communicating results of diagnostic medical investigations to patients.</p> <p>Authors' conclusions: In the absence of included studies, we can draw no conclusions on the effects of using email for communicating results of diagnostic medical investigations to patients, and thus no recommendations for practice can be stipulated. Further well-designed research should be conducted to inform practice and policy for communicating patient results via email, as this is a developing area.</p&gt

Email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals

Background Email is a popular and commonly-used method of communication, but its use in healthcare is not routine. Where email communication has been utilised in health care, its purposes have included use for clinical communication between healthcare professionals, but the effects of using email in this way are not known. This review assesses the use of email for two-way clinical communication between healthcare professionals. Objectives To assess the effects of healthcare professionals using email to communicate clinical information, on healthcare professional outcomes, patient outcomes, health service performance, and service efficiency and acceptability, when compared to other forms of communicating clinical information. Search methods We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1 2010), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to January 2010), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to January 2010), PsycINFO (1967 to January 2010), CINAHL (EbscoHOST) (1982 to February 2010), and ERIC (CSA) (1965 to January 2010). We searched grey literature: theses/dissertation repositories, trials registers and Google Scholar (searched July 2010). We used additional search methods: examining reference lists, contacting authors. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies examining interventions in which healthcare professionals used email for communicating clinical information, and that took the form of 1) unsecured email 2) secure email or 3) web messaging. All healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers in all settings were considered. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed the included studies' risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We report all measures as per the study report. Main results We included one randomised controlled trial involving 327 patients and 159 healthcare providers at baseline. It compared an email to physicians containing patient-specific osteoporosis risk information and guidelines for evaluation and treatment with usual care (no email). This study was at high risk of bias for the allocation concealment and blinding domains. The email reminder changed health professional actions significantly, with professionals more likely to provide guideline-recommended osteoporosis treatment (bone density measurement and/or osteoporosis medication) when compared with usual care. The evidence for its impact on patient behaviours/actions was inconclusive. One measure found that the electronic medical reminder message impacted patient behaviour positively: patients had a higher calcium intake, and two found no difference between the two groups. The study did not assess primary health service outcomes or harms. Authors' conclusions As only one study was identified for inclusion, the results are inadequate to inform clinical practice in regard to the use of email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals. Future research needs to use high-quality study designs that take advantage of the most recent developments in information technology, with consideration of the complexity of email as an intervention, and costs

HealthCare Partners: Building on a Foundation of Global Risk Management to Achieve Accountable Care

Describes the progress of a medical group and independent practice association in forming an accountable care organization by working with insurers as part of the Brookings-Dartmouth ACO Pilot Program. Lists lessons learned and elements of success

Protecting Patient Privacy: Strategies for Regulating Electronic Health Records Exchange

The report offers policymakers 10 recommendations to protect patient privacy as New York state develops a centralized system for sharing electronic medical records. Those recommendations include:Require that the electronic systems employed by HIEs have the capability to sort and segregate medical information in order to comply with guaranteed privacy protections of New York and federal law. Presently, they do not.Offer patients the right to opt-out of the system altogether. Currently, people's records can be uploaded to the system without their consent.Require that patient consent forms offer clear information-sharing options. The forms should give patients three options: to opt-in and allow providers access to their electronic medical records, to opt-out except in the event of a medical emergency, or to opt-out altogether.Prohibit and sanction the misuse of medical information. New York must protect patients from potential bad actors--that small minority of providers who may abuse information out of fear, prejudice or malice.Prohibit the health information-sharing networks from selling data. The State Legislature should pass legislation prohibiting the networks from selling patients' private health information

Increasing the Capacity of Primary Care Through Enabling Technology.

Primary care is the foundation of effective and high-quality health care. The role of primary care clinicians has expanded to encompass coordination of care across multiple providers and management of more patients with complex conditions. Enabling technology has the potential to expand the capacity for primary care clinicians to provide integrated, accessible care that channels expertise to the patient and brings specialty consultations into the primary care clinic. Furthermore, technology offers opportunities to engage patients in advancing their health through improved communication and enhanced self-management of chronic conditions. This paper describes enabling technologies in four domains (the body, the home, the community, and the primary care clinic) that can support the critical role primary care clinicians play in the health care system. It also identifies challenges to incorporating these technologies into primary care clinics, care processes, and workflow

Email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals

Email is one of the most widely used methods of communication, but its use in healthcare is still uncommon. Where email communication has been utilised in health care, its purposes have included clinical communication between healthcare professionals, but the effects of using email in this way are not well known. We updated a 2012 review of the use of email for two-way clinical communication between healthcare professionals