Terese Otte-Trojel1, Antoinette de Bont2, Thomas G Rundall3, Joris van de Klundert2. 1. Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands ottetrojel@bmg.eur.nl ottetrojel@berkeley.edu. 2. Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Numerous articles have reported on the development of patient portals, including development problems and solutions. We review these articles to inform future patient portal development efforts and to provide a summary of the evidence base that can guide future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review of relevant literature to answer 5 questions: (1) What categories of problems related to patient portal development have been defined? (2) What causal factors have been identified by problem analysis and diagnosis? (3) What solutions have been proposed to ameliorate these causal factors? (4) Which proposed solutions have been implemented and in which organizational contexts? (5) Have implemented solutions been evaluated and what learning has been generated? Through searches on PubMed, ScienceDirect and LISTA, we included 109 articles. RESULTS: We identified 5 main problem categories: achieving patient engagement, provider engagement, appropriate data governance, security and interoperability, and a sustainable business model. Further, we identified key factors contributing to these problems as well as solutions proposed to ameliorate them. While about half (45) of the 109 articles proposed solutions, fewer than half of these solutions (18) were implemented, and even fewer (5) were evaluated to generate learning about their effects. DISCUSSION: Few studies systematically report on the patient portal development processes. As a result, the review does not provide an evidence base for portal development. CONCLUSION: Our findings support a set of recommendations for advancement of the evidence base: future research should build on existing evidence, draw on principles from design sciences conveyed in the problem-solving cycle, and seek to produce evidence within various different organizational contexts.
OBJECTIVE: Numerous articles have reported on the development of patient portals, including development problems and solutions. We review these articles to inform future patient portal development efforts and to provide a summary of the evidence base that can guide future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review of relevant literature to answer 5 questions: (1) What categories of problems related to patient portal development have been defined? (2) What causal factors have been identified by problem analysis and diagnosis? (3) What solutions have been proposed to ameliorate these causal factors? (4) Which proposed solutions have been implemented and in which organizational contexts? (5) Have implemented solutions been evaluated and what learning has been generated? Through searches on PubMed, ScienceDirect and LISTA, we included 109 articles. RESULTS: We identified 5 main problem categories: achieving patient engagement, provider engagement, appropriate data governance, security and interoperability, and a sustainable business model. Further, we identified key factors contributing to these problems as well as solutions proposed to ameliorate them. While about half (45) of the 109 articles proposed solutions, fewer than half of these solutions (18) were implemented, and even fewer (5) were evaluated to generate learning about their effects. DISCUSSION: Few studies systematically report on the patient portal development processes. As a result, the review does not provide an evidence base for portal development. CONCLUSION: Our findings support a set of recommendations for advancement of the evidence base: future research should build on existing evidence, draw on principles from design sciences conveyed in the problem-solving cycle, and seek to produce evidence within various different organizational contexts.
Authors: Douglas S Wakefield; David Mehr; Lynn Keplinger; Shannon Canfield; Rajitha Gopidi; Bonnie J Wakefield; Richelle J Koopman; Jeffery L Belden; Robin Kruse; Karl M Kochendorfer Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2010-05-15 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: A Dogac; M Yuksel; A Avci; B Ceyhan; U Hülür; Z Eryilmaz; S Mollahaliloglu; E Atbakan; R Akdag Journal: Methods Inf Med Date: 2010-12-06 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Terese Otte-Trojel; Antoinette de Bont; Marcello Aspria; Samantha Adams; Thomas G Rundall; Joris van de Klundert; Marleen de Mul Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2015-07-07 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Jennifer N Hill; Bridget M Smith; Frances M Weaver; Kim M Nazi; Florian P Thomas; Barry Goldstein; Timothy P Hogan Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Ann Scheck McAlearney; Alice Gaughan; Sarah R MacEwan; Naleef Fareed; Timothy R Huerta Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2019-05-13 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Allison J Lazard; Ivan Watkins; Michael S Mackert; Bo Xie; Keri K Stephens; Heidi Shalev Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Sarah A Collins; Ronen Rozenblum; Wai Yin Leung; Constance Rc Morrison; Diana L Stade; Kelly McNally; Patricia Q Bourie; Anthony Massaro; Seth Bokser; Cindy Dwyer; Ryan S Greysen; Priyanka Agarwal; Kevin Thornton; Anuj K Dalal Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Erin E Hahn; Aileen Baecker; Ernest Shen; Eric C Haupt; Wahid Wakach; Andre Ahuja; Tracy M Imley; Michael K Gould; Michael Kanter Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 5.128