Daniel M Walker1,2,3, Jennifer L Hefner2,4, Naleef Fareed2,3, Timothy R Huerta1,2,3,4, Ann Scheck McAlearney1,2,3,4. 1. Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 2. The Center for the Advancement of Team Science, Analytics, and Systems Thinking, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 3. Department of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 4. Division of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
Background: Age and race disparities in the use of new technologies-the digital divide-may be limiting the potential of patient-facing health information technology to improve health and health care. Objective: To investigate whether disparities exist in the use of patient portals designed specifically for the inpatient environment. Methods: Patients admitted to the six hospitals affiliated with a large, Midwestern academic medical center from July 2017 to July 2018 were provided with access to a tablet equipped with an inpatient portal and recruited to participate in the study (n = 842). Demographic characteristics of study enrollees were obtained from patients' electronic health records and surveys given to patients during their hospital stay. Log files from the inpatient portal were used to create a global measure of use and calculate use rates for specific portal features. Results: We found both age and race disparities in use of the inpatient portal. Patients aged 60-69 (45.3% difference, p < 0.001) and those over age 70 (36.7% difference, p = 0.04) used the inpatient portal less than patients aged 18-29. In addition, African American patients used the portal less than White patients (40.4% difference, p = 0.004). Discussion: These findings suggest that the availability of the technology alone may be insufficient to overcome barriers to use and that additional intervention may be needed to close the digital divide. Conclusions: We identified lower use of the inpatient portal among African American and older patients, relative to White and younger patients, respectively.
Background: Age and race disparities in the use of new technologies-the digital divide-may be limiting the potential of patient-facing health information technology to improve health and health care. Objective: To investigate whether disparities exist in the use of patient portals designed specifically for the inpatient environment. Methods:Patients admitted to the six hospitals affiliated with a large, Midwestern academic medical center from July 2017 to July 2018 were provided with access to a tablet equipped with an inpatient portal and recruited to participate in the study (n = 842). Demographic characteristics of study enrollees were obtained from patients' electronic health records and surveys given to patients during their hospital stay. Log files from the inpatient portal were used to create a global measure of use and calculate use rates for specific portal features. Results: We found both age and race disparities in use of the inpatient portal. Patients aged 60-69 (45.3% difference, p < 0.001) and those over age 70 (36.7% difference, p = 0.04) used the inpatient portal less than patients aged 18-29. In addition, African American patients used the portal less than White patients (40.4% difference, p = 0.004). Discussion: These findings suggest that the availability of the technology alone may be insufficient to overcome barriers to use and that additional intervention may be needed to close the digital divide. Conclusions: We identified lower use of the inpatient portal among African American and older patients, relative to White and younger patients, respectively.
Authors: Adrian G Dumitrascu; M Caroline Burton; Nancy L Dawson; Colleen S Thomas; Lisa M Nordan; Hope E Greig; Duaa I Aljabri; James M Naessens Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Lorraine S Wallace; Edwin S Rogers; Steven E Roskos; David B Holiday; Barry D Weiss Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Daniel M Walker; Alice Gaughan; Naleef Fareed; Susan Moffatt-Bruce; Ann Scheck McAlearney Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Ann Scheck McAlearney; Daniel M Walker; Alice Gaughan; Susan Moffatt-Bruce; Timothy R Huerta Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Alice A Gaughan; Daniel M Walker; Lindsey N Sova; Shonda Vink; Susan D Moffatt-Bruce; Ann Scheck McAlearney Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Terri R Fried; Andrea L Paiva; Colleen A Redding; Lynne Iannone; John R O'Leary; Maria Zenoni; Megan M Risi; Slawomir Mejnartowicz; Joseph S Rossi Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2021-08-31 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Jessica Pugel; Elizabeth C Long; Mary Fernandes; Katherine Cruz; Cagla Giray; D Max Crowley; Taylor Scott Journal: Policy Internet Date: 2021-10-25
Authors: Gennaro Di Tosto; Daniel M Walker; Cynthia J Sieck; Lorraine Wallace; Sarah R MacEwan; Megan E Gregory; Seth Scarborough; Timothy R Huerta; Ann Scheck McAlearney Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Christine M Swoboda; Matthew J DePuccio; Naleef Fareed; Ann Scheck McAlearney; Daniel M Walker Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 2.762