Health-care provider preferences for time-sensitive communications from public health agencies

Primary care provider perspectives on and utilization of a mandatory prescription drug monitoring program in New York City

BACKGROUND

The ways in which prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) have been integrated into primary care practice remain understudied, and research into physician utilization of PDMPs in states where PDMP use is mandated remains scant.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize primary care physician perspectives on and utilization of a mandatory PDMP in New York City.

METHODS

We conducted face-to-face, in-depth interviews with primary care physicians who reported that they currently prescribed opioid analgesic medication. We used a thematic analytic approach to characterize physician perspectives on the PDMP mandate and physician integration of mandatory PDMP use into primary care practice.

RESULTS

Primary care providers demonstrated a continuum of PDMP utilization, ranging from consistent use to the specifications of the mandate to inconsistent use to no use. Providers reported a range of perspectives on the purpose and function of the PDMP mandate, as well as a lack of clarity about the mandate and its enforcement.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest a need for increased clinical and public health education about the use of PDMPs as clinical tools to identify and treat patients with potential substance use disorders in primary care.

An Analysis of Electronic Health Record Work to Manage Asynchronous Clinical Messages among Breast Cancer Care Teams

OBJECTIVE

Asynchronous messaging is an integral aspect of communication in clinical settings, but imposes additional work and potentially leads to inefficiency. The goal of this study was to describe the time spent using the electronic health record (EHR) to manage asynchronous communication to support breast cancer care coordination.

METHODS

We analyzed 3 years of audit logs and secure messaging logs from the EHR for care team members involved in breast cancer care at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. To evaluate trends in EHR use, we combined log data into sequences of events that occurred within 15 minutes of any other event by the same employee about the same patient.

RESULTS

Our cohort of 9,761 patients were the subject of 430,857 message threads by 7,194 employees over a 3-year period. Breast cancer care team members performed messaging actions in 37.5% of all EHR sessions, averaging 29.8 (standard deviation [SD] = 23.5) messaging sessions per day. Messaging sessions lasted an average of 1.1 (95% confidence interval: 0.99-1.24) minutes longer than nonmessaging sessions. On days when the cancer providers did not otherwise have clinical responsibilities, they still performed messaging actions in an average of 15 (SD = 11.9) sessions per day.

CONCLUSION

At our institution, clinical messaging occurred in 35% of all EHR sessions. Clinical messaging, sometimes viewed as a supporting task of clinical work, is important to delivering and coordinating care across roles. Measuring the electronic work of asynchronous communication among care team members affords the opportunity to systematically identify opportunities to improve employee workload.

Variations in Healthcare Provider Use of Public Health and Other Information Sources by Provider Type and Practice Setting During New York City's Response to the Emerging Threat of Zika Virus Disease, 2016

The New York City (NYC) Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) used multiple methods to provide guidance to healthcare providers on the management and prevention of Zika virus disease during 2016. To better understand providers' use of information sources related to emerging disease threats, this article describes reported use of information sources by NYC providers to stay informed about Zika, and patterns observed by provider type and practice setting. We sent an electronic survey to all email addresses in the Provider Data Warehouse, a system used to maintain information from state and local health department sources on all prescribing healthcare providers in NYC. The survey asked providers about their use of information sources, including specific information products offered by the NYC DOHMH, to stay informed about Zika during 2016. Trends by provider type and practice setting were described using summary statistics. The survey was sent to 44,455 unique email addresses; nearly 20% (8,711) of the emails were undeliverable. Ultimately, 1,447 (5.8%) eligible providers completed the survey. Most respondents (79%) were physicians. Overall, the most frequently reported source of information from the NYC DOHMH was the NYC Health Alert Network (73%). Providers in private practice reported that they did not use any NYC DOHMH source of information about Zika more frequently than did those working in hospital settings (29% vs 23%); similarly, private practitioners reported that they did not use any other source of information about Zika more frequently than did those working in hospital settings (16% vs 8%). Maintaining timely and accurate databases of healthcare provider contact information is a challenge for local public health agencies. Effective strategies are needed to identify and engage independently practicing healthcare providers to improve communications with all healthcare providers during public health emergencies.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effectiveness of Traditional and Mobile Public Health Communications With Health Care Providers

Objectives

Health care providers play an essential role in public health emergency preparedness and response. We conducted a 4-year randomized controlled trial to systematically compare the effectiveness of traditional and mobile communication strategies for sending time-sensitive public health messages to providers.

Methods

Subjects (N=848) included providers who might be leveraged to assist with emergency preparedness and response activities, such as physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, physician’s assistants, and veterinarians. Providers were randomly assigned to a group that received time-sensitive quarterly messages via e-mail, fax, or cell phone text messaging (SMS) or to a no-message control group. Follow-up phone interviews elicited information about message receipt, topic recall, and perceived credibility and trustworthiness of message and source.

Results

Our main outcome measures were awareness and recall of message content, which was compared across delivery methods. Per-protocol analysis revealed that e-mail messages were recalled at a higher rate than were messaged delivered by fax or SMS, whereas the as-treated analysis found that e-mail and fax groups had similar recall rates and both had higher recall rates than the SMS group.

Conclusions

This is the first study to systematically evaluate the relative effectiveness of public health message delivery systems. Our findings provide guidance to improve public health agency communications with providers before, during, and after a public health emergency. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:98–107)

Exploring bi-directional and SMS messaging for communications between Public Health Agencies and their stakeholders: a qualitative study

Background

Communication technologies that enable bi-directional/two-way communications and cell phone texting (SMS) between public health agencies and their stakeholders may improve public health surveillance, ensure targeted distribution of alerts to hard-to-reach populations, reduce mortality and morbidity in an emergency, and enable a crucial feedback loop between public health agencies and the communities they serve. Building on prior work regarding health care provider preferences for receiving one-way public health communications by email, fax or SMS, we conducted a formative, exploratory study to understand how a bi-directional system and the incorporation of SMS in that system might be used as a strategy to send and receive messages between public health agencies and community-based organizations which serve vulnerable populations, health care providers, and public health workers. Our research question: Under what conditions and/or situations might public health agencies utilize bi-directional and/or SMS messaging for disseminating time-sensitive public health information (alerts, advisories, updates, etc.) to their stakeholders?

Methods

A mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) study was conducted between April and July 2014. Data collection included a survey distributed to health care providers and semi-structured interviews with providers, community- and government-based organization leaders and directors, and public health agency internal workforce staff. Survey respondents and interviewees were asked about their exposure to public health messages, how these messages are received and how the information in these messages are handled, and in what situations (for example, a local vs. a national event, a pandemic or emergency vs. a health update) a bi-directional and/or SMS messaging system might improve communications between public health agencies and their stakeholder group. Interview and survey data were qualitatively analyzed. Thematic codes were quantitized into dichotomous variables of 0 or 1 on a per respondent basis to enumerate the presence or absence of each thematic code, enable quantitative analysis, and inform interpretation of findings.

Results

Five major themes emerged from synthesizing survey and interview results: 1) Regardless of situational context (emergency vs. non-urgent) and message recipient (stakeholder group), e-mail is a favored modality for receiving public health messages; 2) The decision to use bi-directional, SMS or multiple communication strategies is complex and public health agencies’ need to manage messaging concerns/barriers and benefits for all parties; 3) Both public health agencies and their stakeholders share similar values/uses and concerns regarding two-way public health messaging and SMS; 4) Public health is highly trusted, thus thoughtful, effective messaging will ensure continuation of this goodwill; and 5) Information reciprocity between public health agencies and stakeholders who share their information is essential.

Conclusions

Multiple communication strategies might be utilized but the choice of a specific strategy needs to balance message content (emergency vs. routine communications), delivery (one- vs. two-way), channel (SMS, email, etc.), and public health agency burden with stakeholder preferences and technical capabilities, all while mitigating the risk of message overload and disregard of important communications by recipients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1980-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.