BACKGROUND: Electronic and internet-based tools for patient-provider communication are becoming the standard of care, but disparities exist in their adoption among patients. The reasons for these disparities are unclear, and few studies have looked at the potential communication technologies have to benefit vulnerable patient populations. OBJECTIVE: To characterize access to, interest in, and attitudes toward internet-based communication in an ethnically, economically, and linguistically diverse group of patients from a large urban safety net clinic network. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional study PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (≥ 18 years) in six resource-limited community clinics in the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) MAIN MEASURES: Current email use, interest in communicating electronically with health care professionals, barriers to and facilitators of electronic health-related communication, and demographic data-all self-reported via survey. KEY RESULTS: Sixty percent of patients used email, 71 % were interested in using electronic communication with health care providers, and 19 % reported currently using email informally with these providers for health care. Those already using any email were more likely to express interest in using it for health matters. Most patients agreed electronic communication would improve clinic efficiency and overall communication with clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: A significant majority of safety net patients currently use email, text messaging, and the internet, and they expressed an interest in using these tools for electronic communication with their medical providers. This interest is currently unmet within safety net clinics that do not offer a patient portal or secure messaging. Tools such as email encounters and electronic patient portals should be implemented and supported to a greater extent in resource-poor settings, but this will require tailoring these tools to patients' language, literacy level, and experience with communication technology.
BACKGROUND: Electronic and internet-based tools for patient-provider communication are becoming the standard of care, but disparities exist in their adoption among patients. The reasons for these disparities are unclear, and few studies have looked at the potential communication technologies have to benefit vulnerable patient populations. OBJECTIVE: To characterize access to, interest in, and attitudes toward internet-based communication in an ethnically, economically, and linguistically diverse group of patients from a large urban safety net clinic network. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional study PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (≥ 18 years) in six resource-limited community clinics in the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) MAIN MEASURES: Current email use, interest in communicating electronically with health care professionals, barriers to and facilitators of electronic health-related communication, and demographic data-all self-reported via survey. KEY RESULTS: Sixty percent of patients used email, 71 % were interested in using electronic communication with health care providers, and 19 % reported currently using email informally with these providers for health care. Those already using any email were more likely to express interest in using it for health matters. Most patients agreed electronic communication would improve clinic efficiency and overall communication with clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: A significant majority of safety net patients currently use email, text messaging, and the internet, and they expressed an interest in using these tools for electronic communication with their medical providers. This interest is currently unmet within safety net clinics that do not offer a patient portal or secure messaging. Tools such as email encounters and electronic patient portals should be implemented and supported to a greater extent in resource-poor settings, but this will require tailoring these tools to patients' language, literacy level, and experience with communication technology.
Authors: Ashish K Jha; Catherine M DesRoches; Alexandra E Shields; Paola D Miralles; Jie Zheng; Sara Rosenbaum; Eric G Campbell Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2009-10-26 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Cyrus K Yamin; Srinivas Emani; Deborah H Williams; Stuart R Lipsitz; Andrew S Karson; Jonathan S Wald; David W Bates Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2011-03-28
Authors: Jessica S Ancker; Yolanda Barrón; Maxine L Rockoff; Diane Hauser; Michelle Pichardo; Adam Szerencsy; Neil Calman Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-06-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Urmimala Sarkar; Andrew J Karter; Jennifer Y Liu; Nancy E Adler; Robert Nguyen; Andrea López; Dean Schillinger Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Mita Sanghavi Goel; Tiffany L Brown; Adam Williams; Romana Hasnain-Wynia; Jason A Thompson; David W Baker Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-05-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Urmimala Sarkar; Andrew J Karter; Jennifer Y Liu; Nancy E Adler; Robert Nguyen; Andrea Lopez; Dean Schillinger Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2010
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: Jane Y Zhao; Buer Song; Edwin Anand; Diane Schwartz; Mandip Panesar; Gretchen P Jackson; Peter L Elkin Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2018-04-16
Authors: Lisa V Grossman; Ruth M Masterson Creber; Natalie C Benda; Drew Wright; David K Vawdrey; Jessica S Ancker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Sarah S Nouri; Julia Adler-Milstein; Crishyashi Thao; Prasad Acharya; Jill Barr-Walker; Urmimala Sarkar; Courtney Lyles Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Jordan Eschler; Leslie S Liu; Lisa M Vizer; Jennifer B McClure; Paula Lozano; Wanda Pratt; James D Ralston Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2015-11-05