OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of the use of the UMC Utrecht patient portal, which offers patients real-time access to their hospital electronic medical record, by healthcare providers and patients. DESIGN: Questionnaires and focus group. METHOD: We conducted a single questionnaire survey among healthcare providers (doctors, nurses, secretaries and doctors' assistants) in June 2015, covering topics such as usage of the portal, its user friendliness, and any impact on patient contact and work. Patients - both users and non-users - were surveyed in August 2015. Furthermore, a focus group interview took place with healthcare providers, based on results of the preceding questionnaire. RESULTS: Healthcare providers were familiar with the portal and recognised the importance of sharing medical information with the patient. The portal was technically implemented; however, its use was still low and the portal was not fully embedded in daily practice. Patients using the portal appreciated the rapid access to medical information and the ability to be involved in their own care. An important point of attention was the real-time access to results from diagnostic testing. CONCLUSION: To prevent anxiety in patients and incorrect interpretation of diagnostic results due to use of the patient portal, it is essential to prepare the patient for real-time viewing and to make timely arrangements for discussion of the results and implications for treatment. Future evaluations will follow in order to use the experiences of healthcare providers and patients for further optimisation of this hospital patient portal.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of the use of the UMC Utrecht patient portal, which offers patients real-time access to their hospital electronic medical record, by healthcare providers and patients. DESIGN: Questionnaires and focus group. METHOD: We conducted a single questionnaire survey among healthcare providers (doctors, nurses, secretaries and doctors' assistants) in June 2015, covering topics such as usage of the portal, its user friendliness, and any impact on patient contact and work. Patients - both users and non-users - were surveyed in August 2015. Furthermore, a focus group interview took place with healthcare providers, based on results of the preceding questionnaire. RESULTS: Healthcare providers were familiar with the portal and recognised the importance of sharing medical information with the patient. The portal was technically implemented; however, its use was still low and the portal was not fully embedded in daily practice. Patients using the portal appreciated the rapid access to medical information and the ability to be involved in their own care. An important point of attention was the real-time access to results from diagnostic testing. CONCLUSION: To prevent anxiety in patients and incorrect interpretation of diagnostic results due to use of the patient portal, it is essential to prepare the patient for real-time viewing and to make timely arrangements for discussion of the results and implications for treatment. Future evaluations will follow in order to use the experiences of healthcare providers and patients for further optimisation of this hospital patient portal.
Authors: Liza van Deursen; Anke Versluis; Rosalie van der Vaart; Lucille Standaar; Jeroen Struijs; Niels Chavannes; Jiska J Aardoom Journal: JMIR Cancer Date: 2022-06-14
Authors: Paul A F Geerts; Trudy van der Weijden; Pien G M Loeffen; Lise E F Janssen; Celine Almekinders; Tobias A Wienhold; Gerard M J Bos Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Janine Benjamins; Annemien Haveman-Nies; Marian Gunnink; Annemieke Goudkuil; Emely de Vet Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-01-11 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Bas Hoogenbosch; Jeroen Postma; Janneke M de Man-van Ginkel; Nicole Am Tiemessen; Johannes Jm van Delden; Harmieke van Os-Medendorp Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 5.428