Secure Text Messaging in Healthcare: Latent Threats and Opportunities to Improve Patient Safety

Academic hospitalist perspectives on the benefits and challenges of secure messaging: A mixed methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Hospitals and patients rely on effective clinician communication. Asynchronous electronic secure messaging (SM) systems are a common way for hospitalists to communicate, but few studies have evaluated how hospitalists are navigating the adoption of SM and the benefits and challenges they are encountering.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to assess academic hospitalist perspectives on SM to guide future research and quality improvement initiatives.

METHODS

This was a mixed methods study utilizing an embedded REDCap survey and six virtual semistructured focus groups. It took place during a Hospital Medicine ReEngineering Network Zoom meeting on October 13, 2023. Rapid qualitative methods were used to define major themes.

RESULTS

There were 28 hospitalists and one patient representative across 24 separate academic institutions. There was a 71% survey completion rate (N = 20). SM was felt to be an effective and efficient communication modality but was associated with a large amount of multitasking and interruptions. Perspectives around SM clustered around three main themes: SM has been widely but variably adopted; there is a lack of institutional guidance about how to best engage with SM; and SM is changing the landscape of hospitalist work by increasing ease but decreasing depth of communication, increasing cognitive load, and changing interpersonal relationships. Recommendations for SM improvements included the need for institutions to work with frontline workers to develop and implement clear usage guidelines.

CONCLUSION

SM is likely contributing to both positive and negative effects for clinicians and patients. Understanding hospitalist perspectives on SM will help guide future research and quality improvement initiatives.

Secure Messaging and Telephone Use for Clinician-to-Clinician Communication

This cohort study investigates the association of use of text-based secured messaging with telephone use among resident physicians.

Contributors to Electronic Health Record-Integrated Secure Messaging Use: A Study of Over 33,000 Health Care Professionals

OBJECTIVES

 Electronic health record (EHR)-integrated secure messaging is extensively used for communication between clinicians. We investigated the factors contributing to secure messaging use in a large health care system.

METHODS

 This was a cross-sectional study that included 14 hospitals and 263 outpatient clinic locations. Data on EHR-integrated secure messaging use over a 1-month period (February 1, 2023, through February 28, 2023) were collected. A multilevel mixed effects model was used to assess the contribution of clinical role, clinical unit (i.e., specific inpatient ward or outpatient clinic), hospital or clinic location (i.e., Hospital X or Outpatient Clinic Building Y), and inpatient versus outpatient setting toward secure messaging use.

RESULTS

 Of the 33,195 health care professionals who worked during the study period, 20,576 (62%) were secure messaging users. In total, 25.3% of the variability in messaging use was attributable to the clinical unit and 30.5% was attributable to the hospital or clinic location. Compared with nurses, advanced practice providers, pharmacists, and physicians were more likely to use secure messaging, whereas medical assistants, social workers, and therapists were less likely (p < 0.001). After adjusting for other factors, inpatient versus outpatient setting was not associated with secure messaging use.

CONCLUSION

 Secure messaging was widely used; however, there was substantial variation by clinical role, clinical unit, and hospital or clinic location. Our results suggest that interventions and policies for managing secure messaging behaviors are likely to be most effective if they are not only set at the organizational level but also communicated and tailored toward individual clinical units and clinician workflows.

Characterizing the Patterns of Electronic Health Record-Integrated Secure Messaging Use: Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Communication among health care professionals is essential for the delivery of safe clinical care. Secure messaging has rapidly emerged as a new mode of asynchronous communication. Despite its popularity, relatively little is known about how secure messaging is used and how such use contributes to communication burden.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to characterize the use of an electronic health record-integrated secure messaging platform across 14 hospitals and 263 outpatient clinics within a large health care system.

METHODS

We collected metadata on the use of the Epic Systems Secure Chat platform for 6 months (July 2022 to January 2023). Information was retrieved on message volume, response times, message characteristics, messages sent and received by users, user roles, and work settings (inpatient vs outpatient).

RESULTS

A total of 32,881 users sent 9,639,149 messages during the study. Median daily message volume was 53,951 during the first 2 weeks of the study and 69,526 during the last 2 weeks, resulting in an overall increase of 29% (P=.03). Nurses were the most frequent users of secure messaging (3,884,270/9,639,149, 40% messages), followed by physicians (2,387,634/9,639,149, 25% messages), and medical assistants (1,135,577/9,639,149, 12% messages). Daily message frequency varied across users; inpatient advanced practice providers and social workers interacted with the highest number of messages per day (median 19). Conversations were predominantly between 2 users (1,258,036/1,547,879, 81% conversations), with a median of 2 conversational turns and a median response time of 2.4 minutes. The largest proportion of inpatient messages was from nurses to physicians (972,243/4,749,186, 20% messages) and physicians to nurses (606,576/4,749,186, 13% messages), while the largest proportion of outpatient messages was from physicians to nurses (344,048/2,192,488, 16% messages) and medical assistants to other medical assistants (236,694/2,192,488, 11% messages).

CONCLUSIONS

Secure messaging was widely used by a diverse range of health care professionals, with ongoing growth throughout the study and many users interacting with more than 20 messages per day. The short message response times and high messaging volume observed highlight the interruptive nature of secure messaging, raising questions about its potentially harmful effects on clinician workflow, cognition, and errors.

Barriers to Adoption of a Secure Text Messaging System: a Qualitative Study of Practicing Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Secure text messaging systems (STMS) offer HIPAA-compliant text messaging and mobile phone call functionalities that are more efficient than traditional paging. Although some studies associate improved provider satisfaction and healthcare delivery with STMS use, healthcare organizations continue to struggle with achieving widespread and sustained STMS adoption.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the barriers to adoption of an STMS among physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs).

DESIGN

We qualitatively analyzed free-text comments that clinicians (physicians and APPs) across a large healthcare organization offered on a survey about STMS perceptions.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1110 clinicians who provided a free-text comment in response to one of four open-ended survey questions.

APPROACH

Data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach and constant comparative method to characterize responses and identify themes.

KEY RESULTS

The overall survey response rate was 20.5% (n = 1254). Clinicians familiar with the STMS frequently believed the STMS was unnecessary (existing tools worked well enough) and would overburden them with more communications. They were frustrated that the STMS app had to be downloaded onto their personal mobile device and that it drained their battery. Ambiguity regarding who was reachable in the app led to missed messages and drove distrust of the STMS. Clinicians saw the exclusion of other care team members (e.g., nurses) from the STMS as problematic; however, some clinicians at hospitals with expanded STMS access complained of excessive messages. Secondhand reports of several of these barriers prevented new users from downloading the app and contributed to ongoing low use.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians are reluctant to adopt an STMS that does not offer a clear and trustworthy communication benefit to offset its potential burden and intrusiveness. Our findings can be incorporated into STMS implementation strategies that maximize active users by targeting and mitigating barriers to adoption.