Ophthalmology patients' interest in online access to clinic notes at three US clinics

People with diabetes who read their clinicians' visit notes: Behaviors and attitudes

OBJECTIVES

To understand behaviors and attitudes of adults with diabetes who read their clinicians' visit notes.

METHODS

By linking a large 2017 patient survey involving three institutions with administrative and portal use data, we identified patients with diabetes mellitus from outpatient records and examined reading behaviors related to eligible notes-initial, follow-up, history and physical, and progress notes. We analyzed patients' perceived benefits of reading notes.

RESULTS

2104 respondents had diagnoses of diabetes mellitus and had read ≥1 note in the 12-month period. Patients had an average of 8.7 eligible notes available and read 59% of them. The strongest predictor of reading more notes was having more notes available; the specialties of the authoring clinicians were not correlated with note reading rates. Patients reported understanding notes by primary care clinicians and specialists equally well; more than 90% of patients reported understanding everything or almost everything in a self-selected note. Across visit types, 73-80% of patients reported that note reading was extremely important for taking care of their health.

DISCUSSION

People with diabetes want to read their clinicians' notes, are accessing them at high rates, and report understanding the notes and benefiting from reading them.

Changes in Clinician Attitudes Toward Sharing Visit Notes: Surveys Pre-and Post-Implementation

BACKGROUND

Clinician perceptions before and after inviting patients to read office notes (open notes) are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To describe changes in clinicians' attitudes about sharing notes with patients.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND MAIN MEASURE

Survey of outpatient primary and specialty care clinicians who were from a large group practice and had one or more patients who accessed notes. The main outcome was percent change (before vs. after implementation) in clinician perception that online visit notes are beneficial overall.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 563 invited clinicians, 400 (71%) took the baseline survey; 295 were eligible for a follow-up survey with 192 (65%) responding (119 primary care, 47 medical specialties, 26 surgical specialties). Before implementation, 29% agreed or somewhat agreed that visit notes online are beneficial overall, increasing to 71% following implementation (p<0.001); 44% switched beliefs from bad to good idea; and 2% reported the opposite change (p<0.001). This post-implementation change was observed in all clinician categories. Compared to pre-implementation, fewer clinicians had concerns about office visits taking longer (47% pre vs. 15% post) or requiring more time for questions (71% vs. 16%), or producing notes (57% vs. 28%). Before and after implementation, most clinicians reported being less candid in documentation (65% vs. 52%) and that patients would have more control of their care (72% vs. 78%) and worry more (72% vs. 65%).

CONCLUSIONS

Following implementation, more primary and specialty care clinicians agreed that sharing notes with patients online was beneficial overall. Fewer had concerns about more time needed for office visits or documentation. Most thought patients would worry more and reported being less candid in documentation.

Risks and rewards of increasing patient access to medical records in clinical ophthalmology using OpenNotes

BACKGROUND

The implementation of OpenNotes and corresponding increase in patient access to medical records requires thorough assessment of the risks and benefits of note-sharing. Ophthalmology notes are unique among medical records in that they extensively utilize non-standardized abbreviations and drawings; they are often indecipherable even to highly-educated clinicians outside of ophthalmology. No studies to date have assessed ophthalmologist perceptions of OpenNotes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted from 4/28 to 5/12/2016. A survey was distributed to 30 clinicians (25 ophthalmologists, three optometrists, two nurses) in the University of Colorado's Department of Ophthalmology to evaluate provider attitudes towards granting patients access to online medical records.

RESULTS

Many clinicians felt patients would have difficulty understanding their records and may be unnecessarily alarmed or offended by them. Some clinicians worried their workload would increase and feared having to change the way they document. Perceived benefits of OpenNotes included improving patient understanding of their medical conditions, strengthening patient-physician trust, and enhancing patient care. Many perceived risks and benefits of note-sharing were associated with conceptions of the ideal clinician-patient relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians in ophthalmology perceived both benefits and consequences of increasing patient access to ophthalmic records, and there were significant correlations between these perceptions and their conceptions of the clinician-patient relationship. This is the first study to assess potential ophthalmology provider attitudes toward sharing ophthalmic records. Although limited in sample size and power, this study demonstrates some ways patient-accessible ophthalmic records can affect the clinical practice of ophthalmology and emphasizes the unique challenges of OpenNotes in ophthalmology.

Anticipated Benefits and Concerns of Sharing Hospital Outpatient Visit Notes With Patients (Open Notes) in Dutch Hospitals: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The past few years have seen an increase in interest in sharing visit notes with patients. Sharing visit notes with patients is also known as "open notes." Shared notes are seen as beneficial for patient empowerment and communication, but concerns have also been raised about potential negative effects. Understanding barriers is essential to successful organizational change, but most published studies on the topic come from countries where shared notes are incentivized or legally required.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to gather opinions about sharing outpatient clinic visit notes from patients and hospital physicians in the Netherlands, where there is currently no policy or incentive plan for shared visit notes.

METHODS

This multimethodological study was conducted in an academic and a nonacademic hospital in the Netherlands. We conducted a survey of patients and doctors in March-April 2019. In addition to the survey, we conducted think-aloud interviews to gather more insight into the reasons behind participants' answers. We surveyed 350 physicians and 99 patients, and think-aloud interviews were conducted with an additional 13 physicians and 6 patients.

RESULTS

Most patients (81/98, 77%) were interested in viewing their visit notes, whereas most physicians (262/345, 75.9%) were opposed to allowing patients to view their visit notes. Most patients (54/90, 60%) expected the notes to be written in layman's terms, but most physicians (193/321, 60.1%) did not want to change their writing style to make it more understandable for patients. Doctors raised concerns that reading the note would make patients feel confused and anxious, that the patient would not understand the note, and that shared notes would result in more documentation time or losing a way to communicate with colleagues. Interviews also revealed concerns about documenting sensitive topics such as suspected abuse and unlikely but worrisome differential diagnoses. Physicians also raised concerns that documenting worrisome thoughts elsewhere in the record would result in fragmentation of the patient record. Patients were uncertain if they would understand the notes (46/90, 51%) and, in interviews, raised questions about security and privacy. Physicians did anticipate some benefits, such as the patients remembering the visit better, shared decision-making, and keeping patients informed, but 24% (84/350) indicated that they saw no benefit. Patients anticipated that they would remember the visit better, feel more in control, and better understand their health.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch patients are interested in shared visit notes, but physicians have many concerns that should be addressed if shared notes are pursued. Physicians' concerns should be addressed before shared notes are implemented. In hospitals where shared notes are implemented, the effects should be monitored (objectively, if possible) to determine whether the concerns raised by our participants have actualized into problems and whether the anticipated benefits are being realized.

What are Ophthalmology Patients Asking Online? An Analysis of the Eye Triage Subreddit

Importance

Ophthalmology patients are seeking medical advice on social media websites like Reddit, where users are able to post comments and discuss issues pertaining to different topics that are organized in ‘subreddits’. Understanding which issues are most pertinent will guide ophthalmic providers in delivering more effective patient education.

Methods

This cross-sectional study assessed a systematic sample of the first 22 posts and their top 3 comments from each month since January 27th, 2019, the subreddit’s creation. Information was gathered from reddit.com/r/eyetriage in October 2019 and analyzed in November 2019.

Main Outcomes

The posts were characterized by date and time, inclusion of an image, type, content, emotional tone, and number of upvotes and comments. The comments were categorized based on content, emotional tone, time of comment, and user background. Post and comment content codes were categorized in an iterative manner with differences resolved by author consensus. Categorical statistics were compiled.

Results

Two hundred posts and 456 comments were analyzed since the creation of r/eyetriage, a forum created exclusively for patients to seek advice from health-care professionals. Twenty-six (13%) of the total posts included an image. On average, comments received 1.76 ± 2.17 upvotes along with 4.50 ± 4.47 replies. The most common content codes among the posts were 42 (21.0%) seeking diagnoses, 23 (11.5%) surgical complications, and 13 (6.50%) alternative medication options. Eighty-two (41%) posts conveyed a clear emotional tone, most notably 11 (13.4%) with anxiety and 10 (12.2%) with worry. The top comments came from 165 (36.2%) self-identified patients, 151 (33.1%) optometrists, and 49 (10.8%) ophthalmologists. The top comment codes for replies included 158 (34.7%) with treatment advice, 70 (15.4%) with advice deferred to follow-up appointment with other health-care specialists, and 60 (13.2%) with sharing information.

Conclusions

Patients are asking ophthalmology-related questions on the Eye Triage subreddit, and they are more likely to receive information from other patients or optometrists than from self-identified ophthalmologists. When emotions were revealed, patients were often anxious and worried. Opportunities exist for ophthalmologists to take a more active role on this subreddit and help educate patients.

OpenNotes After 7 Years: Patient Experiences With Ongoing Access to Their Clinicians' Outpatient Visit Notes

Background

Following a 2010-2011 pilot intervention in which a limited sample of primary care doctors offered their patients secure Web-based portal access to their office visit notes, the participating sites expanded OpenNotes to nearly all clinicians in primary care, medical, and surgical specialty practices.

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine the ongoing experiences and perceptions of patients who read ambulatory visit notes written by a broad range of doctors, nurses, and other clinicians.

Methods

A total of 3 large US health systems in Boston, Seattle, and rural Pennsylvania conducted a Web-based survey of adult patients who used portal accounts and had at least 1 visit note available in a recent 12-month period. The main outcome measures included patient-reported behaviors and their perceptions concerning benefits versus risks.

Results

Among 136,815 patients who received invitations, 21.68% (29,656/136,815) responded. Of the 28,782 patient respondents, 62.82% (18,081/28,782) were female, 72.90% (20,982/28,782) were aged 45 years or older, 76.94% (22,146/28,782) were white, and 14.30% (4115/28,782) reported fair or poor health. Among the 22,947 who reported reading 1 or more notes, 3 out of 4 reported reading them for 1 year or longer, half reported reading at least 4 notes, and 37.74% (8588/22,753) shared a note with someone else. Patients rated note reading as very important for helping take care of their health (16,354/22,520, 72.62%), feeling in control of their care (15,726/22,515, 69.85%), and remembering the plan of care (14,821/22,516, 65.82%). Few were very confused (737/22,304, 3.3%) or more worried (1078/22,303, 4.83%) after reading notes. About a third reported being encouraged by their clinicians to read notes and a third told their clinicians they had read them. Less educated, nonwhite, older, and Hispanic patients, and individuals who usually did not speak English at home, were those most likely to report major benefits from note reading. Nearly all respondents (22,593/22,947, 98.46%) thought Web-based access to visit notes a good idea, and 62.38% (13,427/21,525) rated this practice as very important for choosing a future provider.

Conclusions

In this first large-scale survey of patient experiences with a broad range of clinicians working in practices in which shared notes are well established, patients find note reading very important for their health management and share their notes frequently with others. Patients are rarely troubled by what they read, and those traditionally underserved in the United States report particular benefit. However, fewer than half of clinicians and patients actively address their shared notes during visits. As the practice continues to spread rapidly in the United States and internationally, our findings indicate that OpenNotes brings benefits to patients that largely outweigh the risks.

Findings from 2017 on Consumer Health Informatics and Education: Health Data Access and Sharing

OBJECTIVE

 To summarize the state of the art during the year 2017 in consumer health informatics and education, with a special emphasis on sharing health data and accessing personal health information (PHI) from patients' and consumers' perspective.

METHODS

 We conducted a systematic search of articles published in PubMed using a predefined set of queries which identified 228 potential articles for review. The section editors then screened these articles according to topic relevance and selected 15 candidate best papers for full review and scoring by a panel of international experts. Based on the scores and the reviews, four papers received the highest score and were selected in a consensus meeting as the best papers on health data access and sharing from consumers' and patients' perspective.

RESULTS

 These four papers were categorised into the following topics: 1) data sharing for research and governance in privacy protection; 2) use of personal health information and individual privacy concerns; and 3) consumers' views and demographic characteristics regarding health data sharing and the use of digital health portals. Overall, it was surprising to see only a small number of papers reporting original research in this area.

CONCLUSIONS

 Patients understand the need for sharing information to facilitate best care and to enrich biomedical knowledge. When confronted with the reality of accessing information systems for their own information, patients are concerned about usability as well as privacy. Overall, there is a need for more emphasis on: 1) considering privacy as a feature defined by design; 2) using specific consent approaches and data sharing mechanisms for recruiting clinical trial participants; 3) taking into account socio-demographic characteristics when promoting consumer access to personal health information; and 4) defining indicators of high-quality care to incorporate healthcare professionals' level of caution when accessing patients' medical information and fostering patient trust in data exchange. Ultimately, privacy mechanisms should be part of the design process and not only be implemented when security has been breached and violated.

Will use of patient portals help to educate and communicate with patients with diabetes?

OBJECTIVE

Chronic disease management can require daily attention, and increased levels of patient activation and engagement. We examined whether patients with diabetes perceive a greater benefit to having electronic access to their doctors' clinic notes compared to patients without diabetes. We hypothesized that easy electronic access to these notes may help patients with self-care by improving education and communication.

METHODS

Survey of patients with and without diabetes in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania about perceptions of potential benefits and risks of reading their visit notes via an electronic patient information portal. Administrative data were used to identify patients with diabetes; we compared their perceptions to those of patients without diabetes.

RESULTS

The majority of patients (both with and without diabetes) perceived a positive impact of using the portal. Patients with diabetes were significantly more likely to believe that having access to and reading their notes would help them take their medication better and take better care of themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic diseases such as diabetes might receive an even greater benefit from access to their doctors' notes than the general patient population.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Doctors should encourage their patients with diabetes (or other chronic diseases) to use patient portals.