Patient-Centered Digital Health Records and Their Effects on Health Outcomes: Systematic Review

Individual-Level Digital Determinants of Health and Technology Acceptance of Patient Portals: Cross-Sectional Assessment

BACKGROUND

Digital determinants of health (DDoH), including access to technological tools and digital health literacy, function independently as barriers to health. Assessment for DDoH is not routine within most health care systems, although addressing DDoH could help mitigate differential health outcomes and the digital divide.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the role of individual-level DDoH factors on patient enrollment in and use of the patient portal.

METHODS

We developed a multimodal, cross-sectional survey and deployed it to 11,424 individuals based on their preferred mode and language documented within the electronic medical record. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model, enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal were the outcomes of interest. Perceived usefulness and ease of use were assessed to determine construct validity, and exploratory investigations included individual-level DDoH, including internet and device access, availability of technological support, medical complexity, individual relationship with the health care system, and digital health literacy. Counts (n) and proportions (%) were used to describe response categories, and adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios are reported.

RESULTS

This study included 1850 respondents (11,424 invited, 16.2% response rate), who were mostly female (1048/1850, 56.6%) and White (1240/1850, 67%), with an average age of 63 years. In the validation of the Technology Acceptance Model, measures of perceived ease of use (ie, using the patient portal will require a lot of mental effort; the patient portal will be very easy to use) and perceived usefulness (ie, the usefulness of the patient portal to send and receive messages with providers, schedule appointments, and refill medications) were positively associated with both enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal. Within adjusted models, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness constructs, in addition to constructs of digital health literacy, knowing what health resources are available on the internet (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.5, 95% CI 1.8-6.6), portal ease of use (aOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.6-5), and portal usefulness (aOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.4-4.2) were significantly associated with patient portal enrollment. Other factors associated with patient portal enrollment and intent to use included being comfortable reading and speaking English, reported use of the internet to surf the web or to send or receive emails, home internet access, and access to technology devices (computer, tablet, smartphone, etc).

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing for and addressing individual-level DDoH, including digital health literacy, access to digital tools and technologies, and support of the relational aspects between patients, social support systems, and health care providers, could help mitigate disparities in health. By focusing efforts to assess for and address individual-level DDoH, an opportunity exists to improve digitally driven health care delivery outcomes like access and structural outcomes like bias built within algorithms created with incomplete representation across communities.

Use of Patient-Centered Technology and Digital Interventions in Pediatric and Adult Patients with Hematologic Malignancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As society continues to advance in technology, it is important to address how this advancement can impact and enhance patient care. The purpose of this review is to identify patient-centered technology currently available for adult and pediatric patients with and those having survived hematologic malignancies. Given that patients with hematologic malignancies often have to adhere to strenuous medication regimens, coordinate care with many different providers, manage symptoms associated with treatment, and manage late effects associated with survivorship, they would benefit greatly from patient-centered technology aimed at decreasing these burdens.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review found various available digital interventions for this patient population and focuses on an overview of commercially available smartphone applications, patient portals, and technology for remote monitoring. In summary, many digital interventions exist for use in the medical care of oncology patients. The incorporation of these interventions can allow for more personalized medical care, better organization of treatment plans by caregivers at home, and easy delivery of accurate medical information.

Electronic health record-enabled routine assessment of medication adherence after solid organ transplantation: the time is now

Medication nonadherence after solid organ transplantation is recognized as an important impediment to long-term graft survival. Yet, assessment of adherence is often not part of routine care. In this Personal Viewpoint, we call for the transplant community to consider implementing a systematic process to screen and assess medication adherence. We believe acceptable tools are available to support integrating adherence assessments into the electronic health record. Creating a standard assessment can be done efficiently and cost-effectively if we come together as a community. More importantly, such monitoring can improve outcomes and strengthen provider-patient relationships. We further discuss the practical challenges and potential rebuttals to our position.

The Impact of Digital Hospitals on Patient and Clinician Experience: Systematic Review and Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

BACKGROUND

The digital transformation of health care is advancing rapidly. A well-accepted framework for health care improvement is the Quadruple Aim: improved clinician experience, improved patient experience, improved population health, and reduced health care costs. Hospitals are attempting to improve care by using digital technologies, but the effectiveness of these technologies is often only measured against cost and quality indicators, and less is known about the clinician and patient experience.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to conduct a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis to assess the clinician and patient experience of digital hospitals.

METHODS

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and ENTREQ (Enhancing the Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research) guidelines were followed. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases were searched from January 2010 to June 2022. Studies that explored multidisciplinary clinician or adult inpatient experiences of digital hospitals (with a full electronic medical record) were included. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data synthesis was performed narratively for quantitative studies. Qualitative evidence synthesis was performed via (1) automated machine learning text analytics using Leximancer (Leximancer Pty Ltd) and (2) researcher-led inductive synthesis to generate themes.

RESULTS

A total of 61 studies (n=39, 64% quantitative; n=15, 25% qualitative; and n=7, 11% mixed methods) were included. Most studies (55/61, 90%) investigated clinician experiences, whereas few (10/61, 16%) investigated patient experiences. The study populations ranged from 8 to 3610 clinicians, 11 to 34,425 patients, and 5 to 2836 hospitals. Quantitative outcomes indicated that clinicians had a positive overall satisfaction (17/24, 71% of the studies) with digital hospitals, and most studies (11/19, 58%) reported a positive sentiment toward usability. Data accessibility was reported positively, whereas adaptation, clinician-patient interaction, and workload burnout were reported negatively. The effects of digital hospitals on patient safety and clinicians' ability to deliver patient care were mixed. The qualitative evidence synthesis of clinician experience studies (18/61, 30%) generated 7 themes: inefficient digital documentation, inconsistent data quality, disruptions to conventional health care relationships, acceptance, safety versus risk, reliance on hybrid (digital and paper) workflows, and patient data privacy. There was weak evidence of a positive association between digital hospitals and patient satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians' experience of digital hospitals appears positive according to high-level indicators (eg, overall satisfaction and data accessibility), but the qualitative evidence synthesis revealed substantive tensions. There is insufficient evidence to draw a definitive conclusion on the patient experience within digital hospitals, but indications appear positive or agnostic. Future research must prioritize equitable investigation and definition of the digital clinician and patient experience to achieve the Quadruple Aim of health care.

Big 5 Personality Traits and Individual- and Practice-Related Characteristics as Influencing Factors of Digital Maturity in General Practices: Quantitative Web-Based Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Various studies propose the significance of digital maturity in ensuring effective patient care and enabling improved health outcomes, a successful digital transformation, and optimized service delivery. Although previous research has centered around inpatient health care settings, research on digital maturity in general practices is still in its infancy.

OBJECTIVE

As general practitioners (GPs) are the first point of contact for most patients, we aimed to shed light on the pivotal role of GPs' inherent characteristics, especially their personality, in the digital maturity of general practices.

METHODS

In the first step, we applied a sequential mixed methods approach involving a literature review and expert interviews with GPs to construct the digital maturity scale used in this study. Next, we designed a web-based survey to assess digital maturity on a 5-point Likert-type scale and analyze the relationship with relevant inherent characteristics using ANOVAs and regression analysis.

RESULTS

Our web-based survey with 219 GPs revealed that digital maturity was overall moderate (mean 3.31, SD 0.64) and substantially associated with several characteristics inherent to the GP. We found differences in overall digital maturity based on GPs' gender, the expected future use of digital health solutions, the perceived digital affinity of medical assistants, GPs' level of digital affinity, and GPs' level of extraversion and neuroticism. In a regression model, a higher expected future use, a higher perceived digital affinity of medical assistants, a higher digital affinity of GPs, and lower neuroticism were substantial predictors of overall digital maturity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the impact of GPs' inherent characteristics, especially their personality, on the digital maturity of general practices. By identifying these inherent influencing factors, our findings support targeted approaches to drive digital maturity in general practice settings.

Patient and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Patient Access to Test Results via Web Portals: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

A frequently used feature of electronic patient portals is the viewing of test results. Research on patient portals is abundant and offers evidence to help portal implementers make policy and practice decisions. In contrast, no comparable comprehensive summary of research addresses the direct release of and patient access to test results.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to analyze and synthesize published research focused on patient and health care provider perspectives on the direct release of laboratory, imaging, and radiology results to patients via web portals.

METHODS

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Searches were conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, and other databases. Citations were screened in Covidence using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Primary studies that focused on patient and health care provider perspectives on patient access to laboratory and imaging results via web portals were included. An updated search was conducted up to August 2023. Our review included 27 articles-20 examining patient views, 3 examining provider views, and 4 examining both patient and provider views. Data extraction and inductive data analysis were informed by sensitizing concepts from sociomaterial perspectives, and 15 themes were generated.

RESULTS

Patient perspectives (24 papers) were synthesized using nine themes: (1) patterns of use and patient characteristics; (2) emotional response when viewing the results and uncertainty about their implications; (3) understanding test results; (4) preferences for mode and timing of result release; (5). information seeking and patients' actions motivated by viewing results via a portal; (6) contemplating changes in behavior and managing own health; (7) benefits of accessing test results via a portal; (8) limitations of accessing test results via a portal; and (9) suggestions for portal improvement. Health care provider perspectives (7 papers) were synthetized into six themes: (1) providers' view of benefits of patient access to results via the portal; (2) effects on health care provider workload; (3) concerns about patient anxiety; (4) timing of result release into the patient portal; (5) the method of result release into the patient portal: manual versus automatic release; and (6) the effects of hospital health information technology system on patient quality outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The timing of the release of test results emerged as a particularly important topic. In some countries, the policy context may motivate immediate release of most tests directly into patient portals. However, our findings aim to make policy makers, health administrators, and other stakeholders aware of factors to consider when making decisions about the timing of result release. This review is sensitive to the characteristics of patient populations and portal technology and can inform result release framework policies. The findings are timely, as patient portals have become more common internationally.

Building a haemophilia-specific navigator in Epic® Electronic Health Records: Single-centre preliminary experience

INTRODUCTION

With the increasing complexity of haemophilia care and the advent of numerous therapeutic innovations, there is an unmet need for documentation and data collection tools tailored to people with haemophilia (PwH). To date, no fully integrated haemophilia-specific electronic health record (EHR) has been described in the literature.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of integrating a haemophilia-specific navigator into the Epic EHR.

METHODS

Based on clinical experience and registry datasets, we identified key variables describing both PwH and carriers of haemophilia. These were then incorporated into a REDCap database, which served as a starting point for the development of a comprehensive haemophilia flowsheet. We built a dedicated haemophilia navigator within Epic that includes a flowsheet featuring up to 212 variables, as well as customised note templates and patient lists integrating data from the haemophilia flowsheet.

RESULTS

It was feasible to develop a haemophilia navigator within Epic over the course of 12 months. The navigator's flowsheet enables systematic and comprehensive clinical assessment of PwH and carriers, while customised patient lists provide a quick summary of each patient's profile to the haemophilia treatment centre staff and highlight issues that require an intervention. In our clinical practice, patients actively participated in the new documentation process and responded positively to the navigator.

CONCLUSION

Adapting EHRs to the needs of PwH and carriers promotes holistic care for this population and provides an opportunity for patient empowerment. Such haemophilia-specific EHRs are expected to promote standardisation of care and facilitate the collection of registry data on a national and international level.

Assessment of Frailty by the French Version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 on Digital Tablet: Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Frailty assessment is a major issue in geriatric medicine. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) is a simple and practical tool that identifies frailty through a 13-item questionnaire completed by older adults or their family caregivers by self-administration (pencil and paper) or by telephone interview. The VES-13 provides a 10-point score that is also a recognized mortality predictor.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to design an electronic version of the Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13, the French version of the VES-13 (eEVA-13) for use on a digital tablet and validate it.

METHODS

The scale was implemented as a web App in 3 different screens and used on an Android tablet (14.0× 25.6 cm). Participants were patients attending the outpatient clinic of a French geriatric hospital or hospitalized in a rehabilitation ward and family caregivers of geriatric patients. They completed the scale twice, once by a reference method (self-administered questionnaire or telephone interview) and once by eEVA-13 using the digital tablet. Agreement for diagnosis of frailty was assessed with the κ coefficient, and scores were compared by Bland and Altman plots and interclass correlation coefficients. User experience was assessed by a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 86 participants, including 40 patients and 46 family caregivers, participated in the study. All family caregivers had previously used digital devices, while 13 (32.5%) and 10 (25%) patients had no or infrequent use of them previously. We observed no failure to complete the eEVA-13, and 70% of patients (28/40) and no family caregivers needed support to complete the eEVA-13. The agreement between the eEVA-13 and the reference method for the diagnosis of frailty was excellent (κ=0.92) with agreement in 83 cases and disagreement in 3 cases. The mean difference between the scores provided by the 2 scales was 0.081 (95% CI-1.263 to 1.426). Bland and Altman plots showed a high level of agreement between the eEVA-13 and the reference methods and interclass correlation coefficient value was 0.997 (95% CI 0.994-0.998) for the paper and tablet group and 0.977 (95% CI 0.957-0.988) for the phone and tablet groups. The tablet assessment was found to be easy to use by 77.5% (31/40) of patients and by 96% (44/46) of caregivers. Finally, 85% (39/46) of family caregivers and 50% (20/40) of patients preferred the eEVA-13 to the original version.

CONCLUSIONS

The eEVA-13 is an appropriate digital tool for diagnosing frailty and can be used by older adults and their family caregivers. The scores obtained with eEVA-13 are highly correlated with those obtained with the original version. The use of health questionnaires on digital tablets is feasible in frail and very old patients, although some patients may need help to use them.

A Practice-Proven Adaptive Case Management Approach for Innovative Health Care Services (Health Circuit): Cluster Randomized Clinical Pilot and Descriptive Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Digital health tools may facilitate the continuity of care. Enhancement of digital aid is imperative to prevent information gaps or redundancies, as well as to facilitate support of flexible care plans.

OBJECTIVE

The study presents Health Circuit, an adaptive case management approach that empowers health care professionals and patients to implement personalized evidence-based interventions, thanks to dynamic communication channels and patient-centered service workflows; analyze the health care impact; and determine its usability and acceptability among health care professionals and patients.

METHODS

From September 2019 to March 2020, the health impact, usability (measured with the system usability scale; SUS), and acceptability (measured with the net promoter score; NPS) of an initial prototype of Health Circuit were tested in a cluster randomized clinical pilot (n=100) in patients with high risk for hospitalization (study 1). From July 2020 to July 2021, a premarket pilot study of usability (with the SUS) and acceptability (with the NPS) was conducted among 104 high-risk patients undergoing prehabilitation before major surgery (study 2).

RESULTS

In study 1, Health Circuit resulted in a reduction of emergency room visits (4/7, 13% vs 7/16, 44%), enhanced patients' empowerment (P<.001) and showed good acceptability and usability scores (NPS: 31; SUS: 54/100). In study 2, the NPS was 40 and the SUS was 85/100. The acceptance rate was also high (mean score of 8.4/10).

CONCLUSIONS

Health Circuit showed potential for health care value generation and good acceptability and usability despite being a prototype system, prompting the need for testing a completed system in real-world scenarios.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04056663; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04056663.