Literature DB >> 28460042

Information technology to support patient engagement: where do we stand and where can we go?

Daniel M Walker1, Cynthia J Sieck1, Terri Menser1, Timothy R Huerta1,2, Ann Scheck McAlearney1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Given the strong push to empower patients and make them partners in their health care, we evaluated the current capability of hospitals to offer health information technology that facilitates patient engagement (PE).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an ontology mapping approach, items from the American Hospital Association Information Technology Supplement were mapped to defined levels and categories within the PE Framework. Points were assigned for each health information technology function based upon the level of engagement it encompassed to create a PE-information technology (PE-IT) score. Scores were divided into tertiles, and hospital characteristics were compared across tertiles. An ordered logit model was used to estimate the effect of characteristics on the adjusted odds of being in the highest tertile of PE-IT scores.
RESULTS: Thirty-six functions were mapped to specific levels and categories of the PE Framework, and adoption of each item ranged from 23.5 to 96.7%. Hospital characteristics associated with being in the highest tertile of PE-IT scores included medium and large bed size (relative to small), nonprofit (relative to government nonfederal), teaching hospital, system member, Midwest and South regions, and urban location. DISCUSSION: Hospital adoption of PE-oriented technology remains varied, suggesting that hospitals are considering how technology can create partnerships with patients. However, PE functionalities that facilitate higher levels of engagement are lacking, suggesting room for improvement.
CONCLUSION: While hospitals have reached modest levels of adoption of PE technologies, consistent monitoring of this capacity can identify opportunities to use technology to facilitate engagement.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Entities:  

Keywords:  electronic health record; health information technology; patient engagement; patient portals

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28460042      PMCID: PMC7651912          DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocx043

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  37 in total

1.  Impact of the HITECH Act on physicians' adoption of electronic health records.

Authors:  Stephen T Mennemeyer; Nir Menachemi; Saurabh Rahurkar; Eric W Ford
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Use of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals.

Authors:  Ashish K Jha; Catherine M DesRoches; Eric G Campbell; Karen Donelan; Sowmya R Rao; Timothy G Ferris; Alexandra Shields; Sara Rosenbaum; David Blumenthal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  US hospital engagement in core domains of interoperability.

Authors:  A Jay Holmgren; Vaishali Patel; Dustin Charles; Julia Adler-Milstein
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.229

Review 4.  How outcomes are achieved through patient portals: a realist review.

Authors:  Terese Otte-Trojel; Antoinette de Bont; Thomas G Rundall; Joris van de Klundert
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2014-02-06       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Patient Engagement in Cancer Survivorship Care through mHealth: A Consumer-centered Review of Existing Mobile Applications.

Authors:  Yimin Geng; Sahiti Myneni
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2015-11-05

6.  Meaningful Use Of EHRs Among Hospitals Ineligible For Incentives Lags Behind That Of Other Hospitals, 2009-13.

Authors:  Daniel Walker; Arthur Mora; Mollye M Demosthenidy; Nir Menachemi; Mark L Diana
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 6.301

7.  Differing Strategies to Meet Information-Sharing Needs: Publicly Supported Community Health Information Exchanges Versus Health Systems' Enterprise Health Information Exchanges.

Authors:  Joshua R Vest; Bita A Kash
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.911

8.  Health information technology adoption in California community health centers.

Authors:  Katherine K Kim; Robert S Rudin; Machelle D Wilson
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 2.229

9.  Characteristics of patient portals developed in the context of health information exchanges: early policy effects of incentives in the meaningful use program in the United States.

Authors:  Terese Otte-Trojel; Antoinette de Bont; Joris van de Klundert; Thomas G Rundall
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Use of the Blue Button Online Tool for Sharing Health Information: Qualitative Interviews With Patients and Providers.

Authors:  Dawn M Klein; Gemmae M Fix; Timothy P Hogan; Steven R Simon; Kim M Nazi; Carolyn L Turvey
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  12 in total

1.  Understanding Secure Messaging in the Inpatient Environment: A New Avenue for Communication and Patient Engagement.

Authors:  Cynthia J Sieck; Daniel M Walker; Jennifer L Hefner; Jaclyn Volney; Timothy R Huerta; Ann Scheck McAlearney
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 2.342

2.  Engaging hospitalized patients with personalized health information: a randomized trial of an inpatient portal.

Authors:  Ruth M Masterson Creber; Lisa V Grossman; Beatriz Ryan; Min Qian; Fernanda C G Polubriaginof; Susan Restaino; Suzanne Bakken; George Hripcsak; David K Vawdrey
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Optimizing the User Experience: Identifying Opportunities to Improve Use of an Inpatient Portal.

Authors:  Daniel M Walker; Terri Menser; Po-Yin Yen; Ann Scheck McAlearney
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  The Role of Participants in a Medical Information Commons.

Authors:  Mary A Majumder; Juli M Bollinger; Angela G Villanueva; Patricia A Deverka; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.718

5.  Exploring the Digital Divide: Age and Race Disparities in Use of an Inpatient Portal.

Authors:  Daniel M Walker; Jennifer L Hefner; Naleef Fareed; Timothy R Huerta; Ann Scheck McAlearney
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 3.536

6.  Framework for Evaluating and Implementing Inpatient Portals: a Multi-stakeholder Perspective.

Authors:  Daniel M Walker; Jennifer L Hefner; Cynthia J Sieck; Timothy R Huerta; Ann Scheck McAlearney
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 4.460

7.  Patient portal adoption and use by hospitalized cancer patients: a retrospective study of its impact on adverse events, utilization, and patient satisfaction.

Authors:  Duaa Aljabri; Adrian Dumitrascu; M Caroline Burton; Launia White; Mahmud Khan; Sudha Xirasagar; Ronnie Horner; James Naessens
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Is Blockchain Technology Suitable for Managing Personal Health Records? Mixed-Methods Study to Test Feasibility.

Authors:  Yu Rang Park; Eunsol Lee; Wonjun Na; Sungjun Park; Yura Lee; Jae-Ho Lee
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 5.428

9.  Managing Patient-Generated Health Data Through Mobile Personal Health Records: Analysis of Usage Data.

Authors:  Yu Rang Park; Yura Lee; Ji Young Kim; Jeonghoon Kim; Hae Reong Kim; Young-Hak Kim; Woo Sung Kim; Jae-Ho Lee
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2018-04-09       Impact factor: 4.773

10.  Barriers and Facilitators Affecting Patient Portal Implementation from an Organizational Perspective: Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Laura Kooij; Wim G Groen; Wim H van Harten
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-05-11       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.