BACKGROUND: Electronic patient portals give patients access to information from their electronic health record and the ability to message their providers. These tools are becoming more widely used and are expected to promote patient engagement with health care. OBJECTIVE: To quantify portal usage and explore potential differences in adoption and use according to patients' socioeconomic and clinical characteristics in a network of federally qualified health centers serving New York City and neighboring counties. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from portal and electronic health records. PARTICIPANTS: 74,368 adult patients seen between April 2008 and April 2010. MAIN MEASURES: Odds of receiving an access code to the portal, activating the account, and using the portal more than once KEY RESULTS: Over the 2 years of the study, 16% of patients (n = 11,903) received an access code. Of these, 60% (n = 7138) activated the account, and 49% (n = 5791) used the account two or more times. Patients with chronic conditions were more likely to receive an access code and to become repeat users. In addition, the odds of receiving an access code were significantly higher for whites, women, younger patients, English speakers, and the insured. The odds of repeat portal use, among those with activated accounts, increased with white race, English language, and private insurance or Medicaid compared to no insurance. Racial disparities were small but persisted in models that controlled for language, insurance, and health status. CONCLUSIONS: We found good early rates of adoption and use of an electronic patient portal during the first 2 years of its deployment among a predominantly low-income population, especially among patients with chronic diseases. Disparities in access to and usage of the portal were evident but were smaller than those reported recently in other populations. Continued efforts will be needed to ensure that portals are usable for and used by disadvantaged groups so that all patients benefit equally from these technologies.
BACKGROUND: Electronic patient portals give patients access to information from their electronic health record and the ability to message their providers. These tools are becoming more widely used and are expected to promote patient engagement with health care. OBJECTIVE: To quantify portal usage and explore potential differences in adoption and use according to patients' socioeconomic and clinical characteristics in a network of federally qualified health centers serving New York City and neighboring counties. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from portal and electronic health records. PARTICIPANTS: 74,368 adult patients seen between April 2008 and April 2010. MAIN MEASURES: Odds of receiving an access code to the portal, activating the account, and using the portal more than once KEY RESULTS: Over the 2 years of the study, 16% of patients (n = 11,903) received an access code. Of these, 60% (n = 7138) activated the account, and 49% (n = 5791) used the account two or more times. Patients with chronic conditions were more likely to receive an access code and to become repeat users. In addition, the odds of receiving an access code were significantly higher for whites, women, younger patients, English speakers, and the insured. The odds of repeat portal use, among those with activated accounts, increased with white race, English language, and private insurance or Medicaid compared to no insurance. Racial disparities were small but persisted in models that controlled for language, insurance, and health status. CONCLUSIONS: We found good early rates of adoption and use of an electronic patient portal during the first 2 years of its deployment among a predominantly low-income population, especially among patients with chronic diseases. Disparities in access to and usage of the portal were evident but were smaller than those reported recently in other populations. Continued efforts will be needed to ensure that portals are usable for and used by disadvantaged groups so that all patients benefit equally from these technologies.
Authors: Douglas W Roblin; Thomas K Houston; Jeroan J Allison; Peter J Joski; Edmund R Becker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Bradford W Hesse; David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Robert T Croyle; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; Kasisomayajula Viswanath Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005 Dec 12-26
Authors: James S Kahn; Joan F Hilton; T Van Nunnery; Skip Leasure; Kelly M Bryant; C Bradley Hare; David H Thom Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kim M Nazi; Timothy P Hogan; Todd H Wagner; D Keith McInnes; Bridget M Smith; David Haggstrom; Neale R Chumbler; Allen L Gifford; Kathleen G Charters; Jason J Saleem; Kenneth R Weingardt; Linda F Fischetti; Frances M Weaver Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Andrea Hassol; James M Walker; David Kidder; Kim Rokita; David Young; Steven Pierdon; Deborah Deitz; Sarah Kuck; Eduardo Ortiz Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2004-08-06 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Stacy C Bailey; Rachel O'Conor; Elizabeth A Bojarski; Rebecca Mullen; Rachel E Patzer; Daniel Vicencio; Kara L Jacobson; Ruth M Parker; Michael S Wolf Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-11-02 Impact factor: 3.377
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
Authors: Gerardo Moreno; Elizabeth H Lin; Eva Chang; Ron L Johnson; Heidi Berthoud; Cam C Solomon; Leo S Morales Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Adam Schickedanz; David Huang; Andrea Lopez; Edna Cheung; C R Lyles; Tom Bodenheimer; Urmimala Sarkar Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-02-20 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jennifer Elston Lafata; Carrie A Miller; Deirdre A Shires; Karen Dyer; Scott M Ratliff; Michelle Schreiber Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 2.229