Literature DB >> 15299001

Patient experiences and attitudes about access to a patient electronic health care record and linked web messaging.

Andrea Hassol1, James M Walker, David Kidder, Kim Rokita, David Young, Steven Pierdon, Deborah Deitz, Sarah Kuck, Eduardo Ortiz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Patient access to their electronic health care record (EHR) and Web-based communication between patients and providers can potentially improve the quality of health care, but little is known about patients' attitudes toward this combined electronic access. The objective of our study was to evaluate patients' values and perceptions regarding Web-based communication with their primary care providers in the context of access to their electronic health care record.
METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 4,282 members of the Geisinger Health System who are registered users of an application (MyChart) that allows patients to communicate electronically with their providers and view selected portions of their EHR. To supplement the survey, we also conducted focus groups with 25 patients who were using the system and conducted one-on-one interviews with ten primary care clinicians. We collected and analyzed data on user satisfaction, ease of use, communication preferences, and the completeness and accuracy of the patient EHR.
RESULTS: A total of 4,282 registered patient EHR users were invited to participate in the survey; 1,421 users (33%) completed the survey, 60% of them female. The age distribution of users was as follows: 18 to 30 (5%), 31 to 45 (24%), 46 to 64 (54%), 65 and older (16%). Using a continuous scale from 1 to 100, the majority of users indicated that the system was easy to use (mean scores ranged from 78 to 85) and that their medical record information was complete, accurate, and understandable (mean scores ranged from 65 to 85). Only a minority of users was concerned about the confidentiality of their information or about seeing abnormal test results after receiving only an explanatory electronic message from their provider. Patients preferred e-mail communication for some interactions (e.g., requesting prescription renewals, obtaining general medical information), whereas they preferred in-person communication for others (e.g., getting treatment instructions). Telephone or written communication was never their preferred communication channel. In contrast, physicians were more likely to prefer telephone communication and less likely to prefer e-mail communication.
CONCLUSION: Patients' attitudes about the use of Web messaging and online access to their EHR were mostly positive. Patients were satisfied that their medical information was complete and accurate. A minority of patients was mildly concerned about the confidentiality and privacy of their information and about learning of abnormal test results electronically. Clinicians were less positive about using electronic communication than their patients. Patients and clinicians differed substantially regarding their preferred means of communication for different types of interactions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15299001      PMCID: PMC524631          DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1593

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  15 in total

1.  Digital doctoring--opportunities and challenges in electronic patient-physician communication.

Authors:  T Ferguson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-10-21       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Guidelines for the clinical use of electronic mail with patients. The AMIA Internet Working Group, Task Force on Guidelines for the Use of Clinic-Patient Electronic Mail.

Authors:  B Kane; D Z Sands
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Bridging the electronic divide: patient and provider perspectives on e-mail communication in primary care.

Authors:  Cheryl A Moyer; David T Stern; Karen S Dobias; Douglas T Cox; Steven J Katz
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.229

4.  Computer use and needs of internists: a survey of members of the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine.

Authors:  D Lacher; E Nelson; W Bylsma; R Spena
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2000

5.  The utility of electronic mail as a medium for patient-physician communication.

Authors:  R A Neill; A G Mainous; J R Clark; M D Hagen
Journal:  Arch Fam Med       Date:  1994-03

6.  Patient access to records: expectations of hospital doctors and experiences of cancer patients.

Authors:  B Fisher; N Britten
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  A survey of patient access to electronic mail: attitudes, barriers, and opportunities.

Authors:  D B Fridsma; P Ford; R Altman
Journal:  Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care       Date:  1994

8.  Patients' experiences when accessing their on-line electronic patient records in primary care.

Authors:  Cecilia Pyper; Justin Amery; Marion Watson; Claire Crook
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Patient on-line access to medical records in general practice.

Authors:  R B Jones; S M McGhee; D McGhee
Journal:  Health Bull (Edinb)       Date:  1992-03

10.  Patients' access to their online electronic health records.

Authors:  Cecilia Pyper; Justin Amery; Marion Watson; Claire Crook; Ben Thomas
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 6.184

View more
  136 in total

1.  Triaging patients at risk of influenza using a patient portal.

Authors:  S Trent Rosenbloom; Titus L Daniels; Thomas R Talbot; Taylor McClain; Robert Hennes; Shane Stenner; Sue Muse; Jim Jirjis; Gretchen Purcell Jackson
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Patient reported barriers to enrolling in a patient portal.

Authors:  Mita Sanghavi Goel; Tiffany L Brown; Adam Williams; Andrew J Cooper; Romana Hasnain-Wynia; David W Baker
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Learning relational policies from electronic health record access logs.

Authors:  Bradley Malin; Steve Nyemba; John Paulett
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 6.317

4.  The challenges in making electronic health records accessible to patients.

Authors:  Leslie Beard; Rebecca Schein; Dante Morra; Kumanan Wilson; Jennifer Keelan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 5.  The insidious problem of fatigue in medical imaging practice.

Authors:  Bruce I Reiner; Elizabeth Krupinski
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Advancing high-quality cancer care: cancer biomedical informatics grid supports personalized medicine and the electronic health record.

Authors:  Deborah Whippen; Mary Jo Deering; Edward P Ambinder
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.840

7.  Designing patient-centered personal health records (PHRs): health care professionals' perspective on patient-generated data.

Authors:  Nicholas Huba; Yan Zhang
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 4.460

8.  Patient Experiences Using an Inpatient Personal Health Record.

Authors:  Janet Woollen; Jennifer Prey; Lauren Wilcox; Alexander Sackeim; Susan Restaino; Syed T Raza; Suzanne Bakken; Steven Feiner; George Hripcsak; David Vawdrey
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.342

9.  Patient web services integrated with a shared medical record: patient use and satisfaction.

Authors:  James D Ralston; David Carrell; Robert Reid; Melissa Anderson; Maureena Moran; James Hereford
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Parental Perceptions of Displayed Patient Data in a PICU: An Example of Unintentional Empowerment.

Authors:  Onur Asan; Matthew C Scanlon; Bradley Crotty; Richard J Holden; Kathryn E Flynn
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 3.624

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.