Wagahta Semere1,2, Scott Crossley3, Andrew J Karter4,5,6, Courtney R Lyles4,5,6, William Brown7, Mary Reed6, Danielle S McNamara8, Jennifer Y Liu6, Dean Schillinger4,5,6,9. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. wagahta.semere@ucsf.edu. 2. Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA. wagahta.semere@ucsf.edu. 3. Department of Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Language, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 4. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 5. Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA. 6. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA. 7. Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 8. Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. 9. Center for Vulnerable Populations, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about patients who have caregiver proxies communicate with healthcare providers via portal secure messaging (SM). Since proxy portal use is often informal (e.g., sharing patient accounts), novel methods are needed to estimate the prevalence of proxy-authored SMs. OBJECTIVE: (1) Develop an algorithm to identify proxy-authored SMs, (2) apply this algorithm to estimate predicted proxy SM (PPSM) prevalence among patients with diabetes, and (3) explore patient characteristics associated with having PPSMs. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: We examined 9856 patients from Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE) who sent ≥ 1 English-language SM to their primary care physician between July 1, 2006, and Dec. 31, 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Using computational linguistics, we developed ProxyID, an algorithm that identifies phrases frequently found in registered proxy SMs. ProxyID was validated against blinded expert categorization of proxy status among an SM sample, then applied to identify PPSM prevalence across patients. We examined patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics according to PPSM penetrance, "none" (0%), "low" (≥ 0-50%), and "high" (≥ 50-100%). KEY RESULTS: Only 2.3% of patients had ≥ 1 registered proxy-authored SM. ProxyID demonstrated moderate agreement with expert classification (Κ = 0.58); 45.7% of patients had PPSMs (40.2% low and 5.5% high). Patients with high percent PPSMs were older than those with low percent and no PPSMs (66.5 vs 57.4 vs 56.2 years, p < 0.001) had higher rates of limited English proficiency (16.1% vs 3.2% vs 3.5%, p < 0.05), lower self-reported health literacy (3.83 vs 4.43 vs 4.44, p < 0.001), and more comorbidities (Charlson index 3.78 vs 2.35 vs 2.18, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with diabetes, informal proxy SM use is more common than registered use and prevalent among socially and medically vulnerable patients. Future research should explore whether proxy portal use improves patient and/or caregiver outcomes and consider policies that integrate caregivers in portal communication.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about patients who have caregiver proxies communicate with healthcare providers via portal secure messaging (SM). Since proxy portal use is often informal (e.g., sharing patient accounts), novel methods are needed to estimate the prevalence of proxy-authored SMs. OBJECTIVE: (1) Develop an algorithm to identify proxy-authored SMs, (2) apply this algorithm to estimate predicted proxy SM (PPSM) prevalence among patients with diabetes, and (3) explore patient characteristics associated with having PPSMs. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: We examined 9856 patients from Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE) who sent ≥ 1 English-language SM to their primary care physician between July 1, 2006, and Dec. 31, 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Using computational linguistics, we developed ProxyID, an algorithm that identifies phrases frequently found in registered proxy SMs. ProxyID was validated against blinded expert categorization of proxy status among an SM sample, then applied to identify PPSM prevalence across patients. We examined patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics according to PPSM penetrance, "none" (0%), "low" (≥ 0-50%), and "high" (≥ 50-100%). KEY RESULTS: Only 2.3% of patients had ≥ 1 registered proxy-authored SM. ProxyID demonstrated moderate agreement with expert classification (Κ = 0.58); 45.7% of patients had PPSMs (40.2% low and 5.5% high). Patients with high percent PPSMs were older than those with low percent and no PPSMs (66.5 vs 57.4 vs 56.2 years, p < 0.001) had higher rates of limited English proficiency (16.1% vs 3.2% vs 3.5%, p < 0.05), lower self-reported health literacy (3.83 vs 4.43 vs 4.44, p < 0.001), and more comorbidities (Charlson index 3.78 vs 2.35 vs 2.18, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with diabetes, informal proxy SM use is more common than registered use and prevalent among socially and medically vulnerable patients. Future research should explore whether proxy portal use improves patient and/or caregiver outcomes and consider policies that integrate caregivers in portal communication.
Entities:
Keywords:
caregiving; diabetes; health communication; health information technology (health IT)
Authors: Mita Sanghavi Goel; Tiffany L Brown; Adam Williams; Romana Hasnain-Wynia; Jason A Thompson; David W Baker Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-05-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Urmimala Sarkar; Andrew J Karter; Jennifer Y Liu; Nancy E Adler; Robert Nguyen; Andrea Lopez; Dean Schillinger Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2010
Authors: Jennifer L Wolff; Jonathan D Darer; Andrea Berger; Deserae Clarke; Jamie A Green; Rebecca A Stametz; Tom Delbanco; Jan Walker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Lina Tieu; Urmimala Sarkar; Dean Schillinger; James D Ralston; Neda Ratanawongsa; Rena Pasick; Courtney R Lyles Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Taya Irizarry; Jocelyn Shoemake; Marci Lee Nilsen; Sara Czaja; Scott Beach; Annette DeVito Dabbs Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Stephanie L Shimada; Jeroan J Allison; Amy K Rosen; Hua Feng; Thomas K Houston Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Celine Latulipe; Syeda Fatema Mazumder; Rachel K W Wilson; Jennifer W Talton; Alain G Bertoni; Sara A Quandt; Thomas A Arcury; David P Miller Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Sarah J Beesley; Alex Powell; Danielle Groat; Jorie Butler; Ramona O Hopkins; Ronen Rozenblum; Hanan Aboumatar; Allison M Butler; Jeremy Sugarman; Leslie Francis; Samuel M Brown Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 9.296
Authors: Dean Schillinger; Nicholas D Duran; Danielle S McNamara; Scott A Crossley; Renu Balyan; Andrew J Karter Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2021-12-17 Impact factor: 14.136
Authors: Wui Ip; Samuel Yang; Jacob Parker; Austin Powell; James Xie; Keith Morse; Rachael C Aikens; Jennifer Lee; Manjot Gill; Shravani Vundavalli; Yungui Huang; Jeannie Huang; Jonathan H Chen; Jeffrey Hoffman; Cynthia Kuelbs; Natalie Pageler Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-09-01
Authors: Dean Schillinger; Renu Balyan; Scott A Crossley; Danielle S McNamara; Jennifer Y Liu; Andrew J Karter Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 3.734