OBJECTIVES: To compare use of 7 shared electronic medical record (SMR) features by adult HIV patients. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study of adult HIV-positive patients in the first 36 months following implementation of the SMR at Group Health and Kaiser Permanente Northern California. METHODS: Automated data from the 36 months following SMR implementation were assessed in 2 integrated delivery systems. Cox proportional hazards analysis identified factors associated with any SMR use. RESULTS: Most (3888/7398) patients used the SMR at least once. Users were most likely to view medical test results (49%), use secure messaging (43%), or request appointments (31%) or medication refills (30%). Initial use was associated with new prescription for antiretroviral therapy (rate ratio [RR] 1.65, P <.001), recent change to a CD4+ count of fewer than 200 cells per microliter (RR = 1.34, P <.02), new HIV RNA of 75 or more copies per milliliter (RR = 1.63, P <.001), or recent increase in non-HIV comorbidity score (RR = 1.49, P = .0001). Users were less likely to be women (RR = 0.49, P = .0001), injection drug users (RR = 0.59, P = .0001), or from lower-socioeconomic status neighborhoods (RR = 0.68, P = .0001), and were less likely to be black (RR = 0.38, P = .0001), Hispanic (RR = 0.52, P = .0001) or Asian/Pacific Islander (RR = 0.59, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: SMR use was higher among HIV patients who had indicators of recent increases in healthcare needs and lower among several vulnerable populations.
OBJECTIVES: To compare use of 7 shared electronic medical record (SMR) features by adult HIVpatients. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study of adult HIV-positive patients in the first 36 months following implementation of the SMR at Group Health and Kaiser Permanente Northern California. METHODS: Automated data from the 36 months following SMR implementation were assessed in 2 integrated delivery systems. Cox proportional hazards analysis identified factors associated with any SMR use. RESULTS: Most (3888/7398) patients used the SMR at least once. Users were most likely to view medical test results (49%), use secure messaging (43%), or request appointments (31%) or medication refills (30%). Initial use was associated with new prescription for antiretroviral therapy (rate ratio [RR] 1.65, P <.001), recent change to a CD4+ count of fewer than 200 cells per microliter (RR = 1.34, P <.02), new HIV RNA of 75 or more copies per milliliter (RR = 1.63, P <.001), or recent increase in non-HIV comorbidity score (RR = 1.49, P = .0001). Users were less likely to be women (RR = 0.49, P = .0001), injection drug users (RR = 0.59, P = .0001), or from lower-socioeconomic status neighborhoods (RR = 0.68, P = .0001), and were less likely to be black (RR = 0.38, P = .0001), Hispanic (RR = 0.52, P = .0001) or Asian/Pacific Islander (RR = 0.59, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: SMR use was higher among HIVpatients who had indicators of recent increases in healthcare needs and lower among several vulnerable populations.
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: James D Ralston; Katie Coleman; Robert J Reid; Matthew R Handley; Eric B Larson Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2010-04 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: 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: 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: Gregory E Simon; James D Ralston; James Savarino; Chester Pabiniak; Christine Wentzel; Belinda H Operskalski Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: William G Weppner; James D Ralston; Thomas D Koepsell; Lou C Grothaus; Robert J Reid; Luesa Jordan; Eric B Larson Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-08-25 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Elena Losina; Bruce R Schackman; Sara N Sadownik; Kelly A Gebo; Rochelle P Walensky; John J Chiosi; Milton C Weinstein; Perrin L Hicks; Wendy H Aaronson; Richard D Moore; A David Paltiel; Kenneth A Freedberg Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2009-11-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Joan F Hilton; Lynsey Barkoff; Olivia Chang; Lindsay Halperin; Neda Ratanawongsa; Urmimala Sarkar; Yan Leykin; Ricardo F Muñoz; David H Thom; James S Kahn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Derek D Satre; Alexandra N Anderson; Amy S Leibowitz; Tory Levine-Hall; Sally Slome; Jason Flamm; C Bradley Hare; Jennifer McNeely; Constance M Weisner; Michael A Horberg; Paul Volberding; Michael J Silverberg Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Parya Saberi; Sheryl L Catz; Wendy A Leyden; Christine Stewart; James D Ralston; Michael A Horberg; Louis Grothaus; Michael J Silverberg Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2015-06
Authors: Natalia V Oster; Sara L Jackson; Shireesha Dhanireddy; Roanne Mejilla; James D Ralston; Suzanne Leveille; Tom Delbanco; Janice D Walker; Sigall K Bell; Joann G Elmore Journal: J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care Date: 2014-04-11
Authors: Susan S Woods; Christopher W Forsberg; Erin C Schwartz; Martha Gerrity; Kim M Nazi; Judith H Hibbard; Thomas K Houston Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Ronald Dendere; Christine Slade; Andrew Burton-Jones; Clair Sullivan; Andrew Staib; Monika Janda Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 5.428