Erasing inequality: Examining discrepancies between electronic health records and patient narratives to uncover perceived stigma and dismissal in clinical encounters

Chatbot for Social Need Screening and Resource Sharing With Vulnerable Families: Iterative Design and Evaluation Study

BACKGROUND

Health outcomes are significantly influenced by unmet social needs. Although screening for social needs has become common in health care settings, there is often poor linkage to resources after needs are identified. The structural barriers (eg, staffing, time, and space) to helping address social needs could be overcome by a technology-based solution.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to present the design and evaluation of a chatbot, DAPHNE (Dialog-Based Assistant Platform for Healthcare and Needs Ecosystem), which screens for social needs and links patients and families to resources.

METHODS

This research used a three-stage study approach: (1) an end-user survey to understand unmet needs and perception toward chatbots, (2) iterative design with interdisciplinary stakeholder groups, and (3) a feasibility and usability assessment. In study 1, a web-based survey was conducted with low-income US resident households (n=201). Following that, in study 2, web-based sessions were held with an interdisciplinary group of stakeholders (n=10) using thematic and content analysis to inform the chatbot's design and development. Finally, in study 3, the assessment on feasibility and usability was completed via a mix of a web-based survey and focus group interviews following scenario-based usability testing with community health workers (family advocates; n=4) and social workers (n=9). We reported descriptive statistics and chi-square test results for the household survey. Content analysis and thematic analysis were used to analyze qualitative data. Usability score was descriptively reported.

RESULTS

Among the survey participants, employed and younger individuals reported a higher likelihood of using a chatbot to address social needs, in contrast to the oldest age group. Regarding designing the chatbot, the stakeholders emphasized the importance of provider-technology collaboration, inclusive conversational design, and user education. The participants found that the chatbot's capabilities met expectations and that the chatbot was easy to use (System Usability Scale score=72/100). However, there were common concerns about the accuracy of suggested resources, electronic health record integration, and trust with a chatbot.

CONCLUSIONS

Chatbots can provide personalized feedback for families to identify and meet social needs. Our study highlights the importance of user-centered iterative design and development of chatbots for social needs. Future research should examine the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of chatbot interventions to address social needs.

Patient perceptions of behavioral flags in the emergency department: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

To combat increasing levels of violence in the emergency department (ED), hospitals have implemented several safety measures, including behavioral flags. These electronic health record (EHR)-based notifications alert future clinicians of past incidents of potentially threatening patient behavior, but observed racial disparities in their placement may unintentionally introduce bias in patient care. Little is known about how patients perceive these flags and the disparities that have been found in their placement.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate patient perceptions and perceived benefits and harms associated with the use of behavioral flags.

METHODS

Twenty-five semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of patients in the ED of a large, urban, academic medical center who did not have a behavioral flag in their EHR. Interviews lasted 10-20 min and were recorded then transcribed. Thematic analysis of deidentified transcripts took place in NVivo 20 software (QSR International) using a general inductive approach.

RESULTS

Participant perceptions of behavioral flags varied, with both positive and negative opinions being shared. Five key themes, each with subthemes, were identified: (1) benefits of behavioral flags, (2) concerns and potential harms of flags, (3) transparency with patients, (4) equity, and (5) ideas for improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient perspectives on the use of behavioral flags in the ED vary. While many saw flags as a helpful tool to mitigate violence, concerns around negative impacts on care, transparency, and equity were also shared. Insights from this stakeholder perspective may allow for health systems to make flags more effective without compromising equity or patient ideals.

How do opt-in versus opt-out settings nudge patients toward electronic health record adoption? An exploratory study of facilitators and barriers in Austria and France

BACKGROUND

Electronic health records (EHR) are becoming an integral part of the health system in many developed countries, though implementations and settings vary across countries. Some countries have adopted an opt-out policy, in which patients are enrolled in the EHR system following a default nudge, while others have applied an opt-in policy, where patients have to take action to opt into the system. While opt-in systems may exhibit lower levels of active user requests for access, this contrasts with opt-out systems where a notable percentage of users may passively retain access. Thus, our research endeavor aims to explore facilitators and barriers that contribute to explaining EHR usage (i.e., actively accessing the EHR system) in two countries with either an opt-in or opt-out setting, exemplified by France and Austria.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory approach using a semi-structured interview guideline was undertaken in both countries: 1) In Austria, with four homogenously composed group discussions, and 2) in France, with 19 single patient interviews. The data were collected from October 2020 to January 2021.

RESULTS

Influencing factors were categorized into twelve subcategories. Patients have similar experiences in both countries with regard to all facilitating categories, for instance, the role of health providers, awareness of EHR and social norms. However, we highlighted important differences between the two systems regarding hurdles impeding EHR usage, namely, a lack of communication as well as transparency or information security about EHR.

CONCLUSION

Implementing additional safeguards to enhance privacy protection and supporting patients to improve their digital ability may help to diminish the perception of EHR-induced barriers and improve patients' health and commitment in the long term.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Understanding the differences and similarities will help to develop practical implications to tackle the problem of low EHR usage rates in the long run. This problem is prevalent in countries with both types of EHR default settings.

Reasons for Acceptance or Rejection of Online Record Access Among Patients Affected by a Severe Mental Illness: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Over the past few years, online record access (ORA) has been established through secure patient portals in various countries, allowing patients to access their health data, including clinical notes ("open notes"). Previous research indicates that ORA in mental health, particularly among patients with severe mental illness (SMI), has been rarely offered. Little is known about the expectations and motivations of patients with SMI when reading what their clinicians share via ORA.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore the reasons why patients with SMI consider or reject ORA and whether sociodemographic characteristics may influence patient decisions.

METHODS

ORA was offered to randomly selected patients at 3 university outpatient clinics in Brandenburg, Germany, which exclusively treat patients with SMI. Within the framework of a mixed methods evaluation, qualitative interviews were conducted with patients who chose to participate in ORA and those who declined, aiming to explore the underlying reasons for their decisions. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Sociodemographic characteristics of patients were examined using descriptive statistics to identify predictors of acceptance or rejection of ORA.

RESULTS

Out of 103 included patients, 58% (n=60) wished to read their clinical notes. The reasons varied, ranging from a desire to engage more actively in their treatment to critically monitoring it and using the accessible data for third-party purposes. Conversely, 42% (n=43) chose not to use ORA, voicing concerns about possibly harming the trustful relationship with their clinicians as well as potential personal distress or uncertainty arising from reading the notes. Practical barriers such as a lack of digital literacy or suspected difficult-to-understand medical language were also named as contributing factors. Correlation analysis revealed that the majority of patients with depressive disorder desired to read the clinical notes (P<.001), while individuals with psychotic disorders showed a higher tendency to decline ORA (P<.05). No significant group differences were observed for other patient groups or characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of ORA is influenced by a wide range of motivational factors, while patients also present a similar variety of reasons for declining its use. The results emphasize the urgent need for knowledge and patient education regarding factors that may hinder the decision to use ORA, including its practical usage, its application possibilities, and concerns related to data privacy. Further research is needed to explore approaches for adequately preparing individuals with SMI to transition from their inherent interest to active engagement with ORA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00030188; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00030188.