Use of an electronic patient portal among the chronically ill: an observational study

Stop the Divide: Facilitators and Barriers to Uptake of Digital Health Interventions Among Socially Disadvantaged Populations

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic ushered in rapid adoption of telehealth services. This study examines patient and provider experience and provides recommendations for facilitating the use of digital health interventions among socially disadvantaged populations. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted from May to July 2021 via semistructured interviews. Forty patients and 30 primary care providers (PCPs) in Louisiana were recruited within an integrated delivery health system and a rural health center. Technology acceptance models were used to develop a thematic coding scheme. Results: Most patients self-identified as Black (67.5%) and female (72.5%), had a mean age of 51 years, lived in an urban area (76.9%), and had Medicaid (57.9%). Most PCPs were White (79.3%) and male (51.7%), had a mean age of 39 years, and reported Medicaid as the predominant insurer (58.6%). Patient use of smartphones for internet access to health and nonhealth activities was common. PCPs noted the need to address misinformation or misinterpretation of information on the internet. Most patients had used a patient portal (72.5%) and noted the convenience of messaging. PCPs reported large increases in messaging workloads. Most patients had had telemedicine visits (65.6%); however, Wi-Fi/broadband problems limited video visits. PCPs expressed concerns regarding the types of chief complaints that are appropriate for telemedicine visits and reported workflow inefficiencies when clinic sessions had mixed visit types. Patients and PCPs valued remote telemonitoring as adjuncts to care; however, limited service availability and insurance coverage were barriers. Conclusion: Infrastructure barriers (broadband, insurance) and workload imbalance temper enthusiasm for using digital health solutions. Health systems should implement complementary patient and provider user-centric strategies for facilitating uptake of technology.

Characteristics of Patients and Proxy Caregivers Using Patient Portals in the Setting of Serious Illness and End of Life

Background: There are few studies examining the usage and utility of patient portals among seriously ill and end-of-life populations and their caregivers. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe portal user characteristics among patients and their caregivers (proxy login) at two time points: (1) the 12 months following an electronic medical record flag for serious illness and (2) during the last 12 months of life. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of Kaiser Permanente Colorado (KPCO) patients with serious illness, as defined by Kaiser Permanente's prognostic algorithm, and their proxy caregivers was performed for the two time periods. Use was characterized as (1) the discrete number of days the portal was used and (2) the number of days that portal features were accessed. Differences in use by user characteristics were assessed. Results: Patients flagged for serious illness (N = 6129) were 70.4 ± 14.2 years of age, and used the portal on average 50.4 days. Patients (N = 6517) in the last year of life were 76.7 ± 13.7 years of age and used the portal on average 43 days. Caregiver proxy use of the portal was low in both cohorts. Patients who were older, female, non-White, and healthier were less likely to use the portal. Conclusions: In comparison with overall KPCO portal use and recent patient portal studies examining use patterns, patient portal use was high among patients flagged with serious illness and nearing the end of life. However, because use was associated with age, gender, and race, addressing barriers to portal adoption among underserved populations and caregiver proxies is key to better leveraging patient portal systems for palliative and end-of-life care.

Functions and Outcomes of Personal Health Records for Patients with Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

The personal health record (PHR) makes it possible for patients to access, manage, track, and share their health information. By engaging patients in chronic disease care, they will be active members in decision-making and healthcare management.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify the functions and outcomes of PHR for patients with four major groups of chronic diseases (cardiovascular diseases, cancers, diabetes, and chronic respiratory diseases).

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted on studies published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. Searching and screening were performed using the keyword of "Personal Health Record" without time limitation, and ended in August 2018.

RESULTS

In total, 3742 studies were retrieved, 35 of which met the inclusion criteria. Out of these 35, 18 studies were conducted in the United States, 24 studies were related to patients with diabetes, and 32 studies focused on tethered PHRs. Moreover, in 25 studies, the function of viewing and reading medical records and personal health information was provided for three groups of chronic patients. Results showed that the use of PHRs helps the management and control of chronic diseases (10 studies).

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that integrated PHRs with comprehensive functions and features were designed in order to support patient independence and empowerment in self-management, decrease the number of referrals to health centers, and reduce the costs imposed on families and society.

Adult patient access to electronic health records

BACKGROUND

To support patient-centred care, healthcare organisations increasingly offer patients access to data stored in the institutional electronic health record (EHR).

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective 1. To assess the effects of providing adult patients with access to electronic health records (EHRs) alone or with additional functionalities on a range of patient, patient-provider, and health resource consumption outcomes, including patient knowledge and understanding, patient empowerment, patient adherence, patient satisfaction with care, adverse events, health-related quality of life, health-related outcomes, psychosocial health outcomes, health resource consumption, and patient-provider communication. Secondary objective 1. To assess whether effects of providing adult patients with EHR access alone versus EHR access with additional functionalities differ among patient groups according to age, educational level, or different status of disease (chronic or acute).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus in June 2017 and in April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and cluster-randomised trials of EHR access with or without additional functionalities for adults with any medical condition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies with 78 to 4500 participants and follow-up from 3 to 24 months. Nine studies assessed the effects of EHR with additional functionalities, each addressing a subset of outcomes sought by this review. Five studies focused on patients with diabetes mellitus, four on patients with specific diseases, and one on all patients. All studies compared EHR access alone or with additional functionalities plus usual care versus usual care only. No studies assessing the effects of EHR access alone versus EHR access with additional functionalities were identified. Interventions required a variety of data within the EHR, such as patient history, problem list, medication, allergies, and lab results. In addition to EHR access, eight studies allowed patients to share self-documented data, seven offered individualised disease management functions, seven offered educational disease-related information, six supported secure communication, and one offered preventive reminders. Only two studies were at low or unclear risk of bias across domains. Meta-analysis could not be performed, as participants, interventions, and outcomes were too heterogeneous, and most studies presented results based on different adjustment methods or variables. The quality of evidence was rated as low or very low across outcomes. Overall differences between intervention and control groups, if any, were small. The relevance of any small effects remains unclear for most outcomes because in most cases, trial authors did not define a minimal clinically important difference. Overall, results suggest that the effects of EHR access alone and with additional functionalities are mostly uncertain when compared with usual care. Patient knowledge and understanding: very low-quality evidence is available from one study, so we are uncertain about effects of the intervention on patient knowledge about diabetes and blood glucose testing. Patient empowerment: low-quality evidence from three studies suggests that the intervention may have little or no effect on patient empowerment measures. Patient adherence: low-quality evidence from two studies suggests that the intervention may slightly improve adherence to the process of monitoring risk factors and preventive services. Effects on medication adherence are conflicting in two studies; this may or may not improve to a clinically relevant degree. Patient satisfaction with care: low-quality evidence from three studies suggests that the intervention may have little or no effect on patient satisfaction, with conflicting results. Adverse events: two small studies reported on mortality; one of these also reported on serious and other adverse events, but sample sizes were too small for small differences to be detected. Therefore, low-quality evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on mortality and other adverse events. Health-related quality of life: only very low-quality evidence from one study is available. We are uncertain whether the intervention improves disease-specific quality of life of patients with asthma. Health-related outcomes: low-quality evidence from eight studies suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on asthma control, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein or total cholesterol levels, body mass index or weight, or 10-year Framingham risk scores. Low-quality evidence from one study suggests that the composite scores of risk factors for diabetes mellitus may improve slightly with the intervention, but there is uncertainty about effects on ophthalmic medications or intraocular pressure. Psychosocial health outcomes: no study investigated psychosocial health outcomes in a more than anecdotal way. Health resource consumption: low-quality evidence for adult patients in three studies suggests that there may be little to no effect of the intervention on different measures of healthcare use. Patient-provider communication: very low-quality evidence is available from a single small study, and we are uncertain whether the intervention improves communication measures, such as the number of messages sent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of EHR access with additional functionalities in comparison with usual care for the most part are uncertain. Only adherence to the process of monitoring risk factors and providing preventive services as well as a composite score of risk factors for diabetes mellitus may improve slightly with EHR access with additional functionalities. Due to inconsistent terminology in this area, our search may have missed relevant studies. As the overall quality of evidence is very low to low, future research is likely to change these results. Further trials should investigate the impact of EHR access in a broader range of countries and clinical settings, including more patients over a longer period of follow-up, as this may increase the likelihood of detecting effects of the intervention, should these exist. More studies should focus on assessing outcomes such as patient empowerment and behavioural outcomes, rather than concentrating on health-related outcomes alone. Future studies should distinguish between effects of EHR access only and effects of additional functionalities, and investigate the impact of mobile EHR tools. Future studies should include information on usage patterns, and consider the potential for widening health inequalities with implementation of EHR access. A taxonomy for EHR access and additional functionalities should be developed to promote consistency and comparability of outcome measures, and facilitate future reviews by better enabling cross-study comparisons.

Quantifying Patient Portal Use: Systematic Review of Utilization Metrics

BACKGROUND

Use of patient portals has been associated with positive outcomes in patient engagement and satisfaction. Portal studies have also connected portal use, as well as the nature of users' interactions with portals, and the contents of their generated data to meaningful cost and quality outcomes. Incentive programs in the United States have encouraged uptake of health information technology, including patient portals, by setting standards for meaningful use of such technology. However, despite widespread interest in patient portal use and adoption, studies on patient portals differ in actual metrics used to operationalize and track utilization, leading to unsystematic and incommensurable characterizations of use. No known review has systematically assessed the measurements used to investigate patient portal utilization.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to apply systematic review criteria to identify and compare methods for quantifying and reporting patient portal use.

METHODS

Original studies with quantifiable metrics of portal use published in English between 2014 and the search date of October 17, 2018, were obtained from PubMed using the Medical Subject Heading term "Patient Portals" and related keyword searches. The first search round included full text review of all results to confirm a priori data charting elements of interest and suggest additional categories inductively; this round was supplemented by the retrieval of works cited in systematic reviews (based on title screening of all citations). An additional search round included broader keywords identified during the full-text review of the first round. Second round results were screened at abstract level for inclusion and confirmed by at least two raters. Included studies were analyzed for metrics related to basic use/adoption, frequency of use, duration metrics, intensity of use, and stratification of users into "super user" or high utilizers. Additional categories related to provider (including care team/administrative) use of the portal were identified inductively. Additional analyses included metrics aligned with meaningful use stage 2 (MU-2) categories employed by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the association between the number of portal metrics examined and the number of citations and the journal impact factor.

RESULTS

Of 315 distinct search results, 87 met the inclusion criteria. Of the a priori metrics, plus provider use, most studies included either three (26 studies, 30%) or four (23 studies, 26%) metrics. Nine studies (10%) only reported the patient use/adoption metric and only one study (1%) reported all six metrics. Of the US-based studies (n=76), 18 (24%) were explicitly motivated by MU-2 compliance; 40 studies (53%) at least mentioned these incentives, but only 6 studies (8%) presented metrics from which compliance rates could be inferred. Finally, the number of metrics examined was not associated with either the number of citations or the publishing journal's impact factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Portal utilization measures in the research literature can fall below established standards for "meaningful" or they can substantively exceed those standards in the type and number of utilization properties measured. Understanding how patient portal use has been defined and operationalized may encourage more consistent, well-defined, and perhaps more meaningful standards for utilization, informing future portal development.

Patient portal utilization: before and after stage 2 electronic health record meaningful use

OBJECTIVE

Patient portal functionalities, such as patient-physician e-communication, can benefit patients by improving clinical outcomes. Utilization has historically been low but may have increased in recent years due to the implementation of Stage 2 Meaningful Use for electronic health records. This study has 2 objectives: 1) to compare patient portal utilization rates before Stage 2 (2011-2013) and after Stage 2 (2014-2017), and 2) to examine whether disparities in patient portal utilization attenuate after Stage 2.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an observational study using a pooled cross-sectional analysis of 2011-2017 National Health Interview Survey data (n = 254 183).

RESULTS

The mean percent use of patient portals significantly increased from the pre-Stage 2 to the post-Stage 2 period (6.9%, 95% CI, 6.2-7.5; P < .001). Non-Hispanic Black individuals (OR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.76-0.86; P < .0001) and Hispanic individuals (OR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.74-0.84; P < .0001) have lower odds of using patient portals compared to non-Hispanic White individuals. Although we found independent effects of race/ethnicity, we did not find a statistically significant interaction between race/ethnicity and time. We found a similar level of increase in patient portal utilization from the pre- to postperiod across racial and ethnic groups.

DISCUSSION

Health care policies such as Stage 2 Meaningful Use are likely contributing to increased patient portal utilization across all patients and helping to attenuate disparities in utilization between subgroups of patients.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to explore which patient portal functionalities are perceived as most beneficial to patients and whether patients have access to those functionalities.

Patient Portal Functionalities and Uptake: Systematic Review Protocol

Background

Patient portals are digital health tools adopted by health care organizations. The portals are generally connected to the electronic health record of the health care organization and offer patients functionalities such as access to the medical record, ability to order repeat prescriptions, make appointments, or message the health care provider. Patient portals may be beneficial for both patients and the health care system. Patient portals can widely differ from one context to another due to the differences in the portal functionalities and capabilities and it is anticipated that outcomes associated with the functionalities also differ. Current systematic reviews report outcomes associated with patient portal uptake but do not explicitly specify the patient portal functionalities.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence on health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult (18 years or older) patients. The review research questions are as follows: What kind of health outcomes do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)? and What kind of health care quality outcomes, including health care utilization outcomes, do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)?

Methods

The systematic review will be conducted by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for relevant literature. The review inclusion criteria will be studies about adult patients (18 years or older), studies only about tethered patient portals, and studies with or without a comparator. We will report patient portal–associated health and health care quality outcomes based on the patient portal functionalities. All quantitative primary study types will be included. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute’s quality assessment tools. Data will be synthesized using narrative synthesis and will be reported according to the patient portal functionalities, country, disease, and health care system model.

Results

Searches will be conducted in September 2019, and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2020.

Conclusions

This systematic review will provide an overview of health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult patients, providing detailed information about the functionalities of the portals and their associations with the outcomes. The review could potentially help patient portal evaluation studies by providing insights into outcomes associated with the different functionalities of patient portals.

Trial Registration

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019141131; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=141131

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/14975

Dose effect of patient-care team communication via secure portal messaging on glucose and blood pressure control

Objectives

Organizational strategies for implementing eHealth tools influence patient and provider use of portal technology. This study examines whether the intensity of bidirectional secure portal messaging is associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Material and Methods

This is a retrospective cohort analysis of 101 019 patients with diabetes or hypertension (11 138 active portal users) who received primary care within the Ochsner Health System between 2012 and 2014. Propensity score-adjusted multivariable fixed effects regression panel analysis was used to examine associations between intensity of "medical advice" portal messaging and glucose/blood pressure control.

Results

Most portal users rarely used medical advice messaging. A higher proportion of patients who were age 50 years and older, female, white non-Hispanic, and with co-morbid diabetes and hypertension had higher frequency and intensity of medical advice messaging. Study findings revealed a dose-response effect of the intensity of messaging on glucose control, whereby, compared to nonportal users, each level of messaging among portal users was associated with greater decreases in HbA1c (β estimate [95% CI]: none -0.28 (-0.34 to -0.22); low -0.28 (-0.32 to -0.24); medium -0.41 (-0.52 to -0.31); high -0.43 (-0.60 to -0.27), all P ≤ .001). There was no observed effect on blood pressure.

Conclusions

The digital divide exists not only between portal users and nonusers but also among portal users. Research exploring the relationship between intensity of bidirectional secure messaging and health outcomes for a broader scope of chronic conditions is needed. Future implementation research must also elucidate best practices that enhance not only the use of portals by patients and providers, but how they use portals.

Patient Engagement as Measured by Inpatient Portal Use: Methodology for Log File Analysis

Background

Inpatient portals (IPPs) have the potential to increase patient engagement and satisfaction with their health care. An IPP provides a hospitalized patient with similar functions to those found in outpatient portals, including the ability to view vital signs, laboratory results, and medication information; schedule appointments; and communicate with their providers. However, IPPs may offer additional functions such as meal planning, real-time messaging with the inpatient care team, daily schedules, and access to educational materials relevant to their specific condition. In practice, IPPs have been developed as websites and tablet apps, with hospitals providing the required technology as a component of care during the patient’s stay.

Objective

This study aimed to describe how inpatients are using IPPs at the first academic medical center to implement a system-wide IPP and document the challenges and choices associated with this analytic process.

Methods

We analyzed the audit log files of IPP users hospitalized between January 2014 and January 2016. Data regarding the date/time and duration of interactions with each of the MyChart Bedside modules (eg, view lab results or medications and patient schedule) and activities (eg, messaging the provider and viewing educational videos) were captured as part of the system audit logs. The development of a construct to describe the length of time associated with a single coherent use of the tool—which we call a session—provides a foundational unit of analysis. We defined frequency as the number of sessions a patient has during a given provision day. We defined comprehensiveness in terms of the percentage of functions that an individual uses during a given provision day.

Results

The analytic process presented data challenges such as length of stay and tablet-provisioning factors. This study presents data visualizations to illustrate a series of data-cleaning issues. In the presence of these robust approaches to data cleaning, we present the baseline usage patterns associated with our patient panel. In addition to frequency and comprehensiveness, we present considerations of median data to mitigate the effect of outliers.

Conclusions

Although other studies have published usage data associated with IPPs, most have not explicated the challenges and choices associated with the analytic approach deployed within each study. Our intent in this study was to be somewhat exhaustive in this area, in part, because replicability requires common metrics. Our hope is that future researchers in this area will avail themselves of these perspectives to engage in critical assessment moving forward.

Assessment of Personal Health Care Management and Chronic Disease Prevalence: Comparative Analysis of Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Health-Related Variables

Background

The use of personal health care management (PHM) is increasing rapidly within the United States because of implementation of health technology across the health care continuum and increased regulatory requirements for health care providers and organizations promoting the use of PHM, particularly the use of text messaging (short message service), Web-based scheduling, and Web-based requests for prescription renewals. Limited research has been conducted comparing PHM use across groups based on chronic conditions.

Objective

This study aimed to describe the overall utilization of PHM and compare individual characteristics associated with PHM in groups with no reported chronic conditions, with 1 chronic condition, and with 2 or more such conditions.

Methods

Datasets drawn from the National Health Interview Survey were analyzed using multiple logistic regression to determine the level of PHM use in relation to demographic, socioeconomic, or health-related factors. Data from 47,814 individuals were analyzed using logistic regression.

Results

Approximately 12.19% (5737/47,814) of respondents reported using PHM, but higher rates of use were reported by individuals with higher levels of education and income. The overall rate of PHM remained stable between 2009 and 2014, despite increased focus on the promotion of patient engagement initiatives. Demographic factors predictive of PHM use included people who were younger, non-Hispanic, and who lived in the western region of the United States. There were also differences in PHM use based on socioeconomic factors. Respondents with college-level education were over 2.5 times more likely to use PHM than respondents without college-level education. Health-related factors were also predictive of PHM use. Individuals with health insurance and a usual place for health care were more likely to use PHM than individuals with no health insurance and no usual place for health care. Individuals reporting a single chronic condition or multiple chronic conditions reported slightly higher levels of PHM use than individuals reporting no chronic conditions. Individuals with no chronic conditions who did not experience barriers to accessing health care were more likely to use PHM than individuals with 1 or more chronic conditions.

Conclusions

The findings of this study illustrated the disparities in PHM use based on the number of chronic conditions and that multiple factors influence the use of PHM, including economics and education. These findings provide evidence of the challenge associated with engaging patients using electronic health information as the health care industry continues to evolve.

Use and Effects of Patient Access to Medical Records in General Practice Through a Personal Health Record in the Netherlands: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

In the Dutch health care system, general practitioners hold a central position. They store information from all health care providers who are involved with their patients in their electronic health records. Web-based access to the summary record in general practice through a personal health record (PHR) may increase patients' insight into their medical conditions and help them to be involved in their care.

OBJECTIVE

We describe the protocol that we will use to investigate the utilization of patients' digital access to the summary of their medical records in general practice through a PHR and its effects on the involvement of patients in their care.

METHODS

We will conduct a multilevel mixed-methods study in which the PHR and Web-based access to the summary record will be offered for 6 months to a random sample of 500 polypharmacy patients, 500 parents of children aged <4 years, and 500 adults who do not belong to the former two groups. At the patient level, a controlled before-after study will be conducted using surveys, and concurrently, qualitative data will be collected from focus group discussions, think-aloud observations, and semistructured interviews. At the general practice staff (GP staff) level, focus group discussions will be conducted at baseline and Q-methodology inquiries at the end of the study period. The primary outcomes at the patient level are barriers and facilitators for using the PHR and summary records and changes in taking an active role in decision making and care management and medication adherence. Outcomes at the GP staff level are attitudes before and opinions after the implementation of the intervention. Patient characteristics and changes in outcomes related to patient involvement during the study period will be compared between the users and nonusers of the intervention using chi-square tests and t tests. A thematic content analysis of the qualitative data will be performed, and the results will be used to interpret quantitative findings.

RESULTS

Enrollment was completed in May 2017 and the possibility to view GP records through the PHR was implemented in December 2017. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in autumn 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

We expect that the findings of this study will be useful to health care providers and health care organizations that consider introducing the use of PHR and Web-based access to records and to those who have recently started using these.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry NTR6395; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6395 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71nc8jzwM).

REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER

RR1-10.2196/10193.

From loquacious to reticent: understanding patient health information communication to guide consumer health IT design

Background and significance

It is increasingly recognized that some patients self-manage in the context of social networks rather than alone. Consumer health information technology (IT) designed to support socially embedded self-management must be responsive to patients' everyday communication practices. There is an opportunity to improve consumer health IT design by explicating how patients currently leverage social media to support health information communication.

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine types of health information communication patterns that typify Facebook users with chronic health conditions to guide consumer health IT design.

Materials and methods

Seven hundred participants with type 2 diabetes were recruited through a commercial survey access panel. Cluster analysis was used to identify distinct approaches to health information communication both on and off Facebook. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) methods were used to identify demographic and behavioral differences among profiles. Secondary analysis of qualitative interviews ( n  = 25) and analysis of open-ended survey questions were conducted to understand participant rationales for each profile.

Results

Our analysis yielded 7 distinct health information communication profiles. Five of 7 profiles had consistent patterns both on and off Facebook, while the remaining 2 demonstrated distinct practices, with no health information communication on Facebook but some off Facebook. One profile was distinct from all others in both health information communication practices and demographic composition. Rationales for following specific health information communication practices were categorized under 6 themes: altruism, instrumental support, social support, privacy and stigma, convenience, and Facebook knowledge.

Conclusion

Facebook has been widely adopted for health information communication; This study demonstrates that Facebook has been widely adopted for health information communication. It also shows that the ways in which patients communicate health information on and off Facebook are diverse.

eHealth Literacy: Patient Engagement in Identifying Strategies to Encourage Use of Patient Portals Among Older Adults

Innovations in chronic disease management are growing rapidly as advancements in technology broaden the scope of tools. Older adults are less likely to be willing or able to use patient portals or smartphone apps for health-related tasks. The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of older adults (ages ≥50) with hypertension or diabetes to examine relationships between portal usage, interest in health-tracking tools, and eHealth literacy, and to solicit practical solutions to encourage technology adoption. Among 247 patients surveyed in a large integrated delivery health system between August 2015 and January 2016, eHealth literacy was positively associated with portal usage (OR [95% CI]: 1.3 [1.2-1.5]) and interest in health-tracking tools (1.2 [1.1-1.3]). Portal users compared to nonusers (N = 137 vs.110) had higher rates of interest in using websites/smartphone apps to track blood pressure (55% vs. 36%), weight (53% vs. 35%), exercise (53% vs. 32%), or medication (46% vs 33%, all P < 0.05). Portal users noted cumbersome processes for accessing portals and variations in provider availability for online scheduling and response times to messages. Portal nonusers expressed concerns about data security, lack of personalization, and limited perceived value of using portals. Both groups noted the importance of computer literacy and technical support. Patient stakeholders recommended marketing initiatives that capture patient stories demonstrating real-life applications of what patients can do with digital technology, how to use it, and why it may be useful. Health systems also must screen for eHealth literacy, provide training, promote proxy users, and institute quality assurance that ensures patients' experiences will not vary across the system.

Enhancing mHealth Technology in the Patient-Centered Medical Home Environment to Activate Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Multisite Feasibility Study Protocol

BACKGROUND

The potential of mHealth technologies in the care of patients with diabetes and other chronic conditions has captured the attention of clinicians and researchers. Efforts to date have incorporated a variety of tools and techniques, including Web-based portals, short message service (SMS) text messaging, remote collection of biometric data, electronic coaching, electronic-based health education, secure email communication between visits, and electronic collection of lifestyle and quality-of-life surveys. Each of these tools, used alone or in combination, have demonstrated varying degrees of effectiveness. Some of the more promising results have been demonstrated using regular collection of biometric devices, SMS text messaging, secure email communication with clinical teams, and regular reporting of quality-of-life variables. In this study, we seek to incorporate several of the most promising mHealth capabilities in a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) workflow.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to address underlying technology needs and gaps related to the use of mHealth technology and the activation of patients living with type 2 diabetes. Stated differently, we enable supporting technologies while seeking to influence patient activation and self-care activities.

METHODS

This is a multisite phased study, conducted within the US Military Health System, that includes a user-centered design phase and a PCMH-based feasibility trial. In phase 1, we will assess both patient and provider preferences regarding the enhancement of the enabling technology capabilities for type 2 diabetes chronic care management. Phase 2 research will be a single-blinded 12-month feasibility study that incorporates randomization principles. Phase 2 research will seek to improve patient activation and self-care activities through the use of the Mobile Health Care Environment with tailored behavioral messaging. The primary outcome measure is the Patient Activation Measure scores. Secondary outcome measures are Summary of Diabetes Self-care Activities Measure scores, clinical measures, comorbid conditions, health services resource consumption, and technology system usage statistics.

RESULTS

We have completed phase 1 data collection. Formal analysis of phase 1 data has not been completed. We have obtained institutional review board approval and began phase 1 research in late fall 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

The study hypotheses suggest that patients can, and will, improve their activation in chronic care management. Improved activation should translate into improved diabetes self-care. Expected benefits of this research to the scientific community and health care services include improved understanding of how to leverage mHealth technology to activate patients living with type 2 diabetes in self-management behaviors. The research will shed light on implementation strategies in integrating mHealth into the clinical workflow of the PCMH setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02949037. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02949037. (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oRyDzqei).

Primary Care Practice Reengineering and Associations With Patient Portal Use, Service Utilization, and Disease Control Among Patients With Hypertension and/or Diabetes

BACKGROUND

We describe the role of primary care reengineering in the Ochsner Health System (OHS) patient portal implementation strategy and compare subsequent trends in service utilization and disease control among portal users vs nonusers within this context.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study includes 101,019 patients with hypertension or diabetes who saw an OHS primary care provider (PCP) between 2012 and 2014. Inverse probability treatment weighting was used to reduce case-mix differences between study groups. We used generalized estimating equation modeling to compare changes in encounter rates (PCP, telephone, specialty services, emergency department [ED], inpatient hospitalization), blood pressure (BP), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c).

RESULTS

Age, sex, race, comorbidities, insurance, preindex utilization, and portal use were associated with changes in utilization, BP, and HbA1C; however, the strength and direction of these differences varied. An adjusted analysis comparing portal users to nonusers showed an increase in PCP (rate ratio per patient per year of 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-1.22) and telephone encounter rates (1.15, 95% CI 1.08-1.22; both P<0.001) but no significant differences in specialty, ED, or inpatient hospitalization encounters. Among patients with preindex systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg, portal users compared to nonusers had a greater decline in their BP, although the between-group difference was small (mmHg [SE], -1.1 [0.42] and -1.2 [0.34], respectively; both P<0.01). Portal users with diabetes compared to nonusers with diabetes also had greater decreases in HbA1c (all patients, % [SE], -0.13 [0.06]; patients with a preindex HbA1c ≥8, -0.43 [0.13], both P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings may reflect patient factors and system-level portal implementation strategies that focused heavily on accessibility to care.

Patterns of Electronic Portal Use among Vulnerable Patients in a Nationwide Practice-based Research Network: From the OCHIN Practice-based Research Network (PBRN)

BACKGROUND

Underserved patient populations experience barriers to accessing and engaging within the complex health care system. Electronic patient portals have been proposed as a potential new way to improve access and engagement. We studied patient portal use for 12 consecutive months (365 days) among a large, nationally distributed, underserved patient population within the OCHIN (originally created as the Oregon Community Health Information Network and renamed OCHIN as other states joined) practice-based research network (PBRN).

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed adoption and use of Epic's MyChart patient portal in the first 12 months after MyChart was made available to the OCHIN PBRN. We examined electronic health record data from 36,549 patients aged ≥18 years who were offered a MyChart access code between May 1, 2012, and April 30, 2013, across the OCHIN PBRN in 13 states.

RESULTS

Overall, 29% of patients offered an access code logged into their MyChart account. Superusers (minimum of 2 logins per month over a 12-month period) accounted for 6% of users overall. Men, nonwhite patients, Hispanic patients, Spanish-speaking patients, and those with the lowest incomes were significantly less likely to activate. Publicly insured and uninsured patients were also less likely to log in to their MyChart account, but once activated they were more likely than privately insured patients to use MyChart functions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that, compared with others, certain patient groups may be less interested in using patient portals or may have experienced significant barriers that prevented use. Making portal access available is a first step. Additional studies need to specifically identify health system-, clinic-, and patient-level barriers and facilitators to portal adoption and use.

Utilization of Patient Electronic Messaging to Promote Advance Care Planning in the Primary Care Setting

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) is an instrumental mechanism aimed at preserving patient autonomy. Numerous interventions have been proposed to facilitate the implementation of ACP; however, rates of completed advance directives (ADs) are universally low. Patient electronic portal messaging is a newer tool in patient-provider communication which has not been studied as a method to promote ACP. In this study, we hypothesized that the use of ACP-specific patient electronic messages would increase rates of AD completion in patients aged 65 years and older in an academic primary care practice.

METHODS

All primary care patients, aged 65+, who had previously enrolled in a patient electronic messaging system, within an academic primary care practice, were included for randomization. Two hundred patients were randomized to receive an electronic message. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each group who completed an AD, 3 months after intervention. Secondary outcomes included clinical utility of the completed ADs and proportion of patients who viewed their electronic messages.

RESULTS

The intervention group completed an AD 5.5% of the time when compared to 2% in the control group (odds ratio 3.2 [1.6-6.3]). Up to 74.5% of patients opened their electronic messages.

CONCLUSION

Among primary care patients aged 65 years and older, use of AD-specific electronic messaging statistically significantly increased the rate of AD completion, but the absolute number of completed AD remained relatively low. These data suggest that this valuable communication tool holds opportunities for further improvement. Older, frailer adults were more likely to complete an AD, and prompted directives were more likely to include a written expression of the individual's health-care values and preference.

A Patient Portal With Electronic Messaging: Controlled Before-and-After Study

Background

Patients’ access to their medical records, along with electronic messaging, offers an efficient means of information transition between patients and their caregivers. Easier access to information and interaction with health care professionals may reduce use of other services while increasing patients’ activation in the management of their own health. Patient portals may therefore have a favorable impact on the cost-effectiveness of care.

Objective

The aim was to assess the benefits and risks of providing electronic messaging services to patients with chronic conditions. Using cost-effectiveness analysis, the outcomes and costs of providing access to an electronic patient portal were evaluated in a real-life treatment process in primary care.

Methods

A total of 876 chronically ill patients from public primary care were allocated to either an intervention group receiving immediate access to a patient portal that included their medical records, care plan, and secure messaging with a care team, or to a control group receiving standard care. Incremental direct heath care costs, health status based on the Short-Form Health Survey, version 2 (SF-36v2), and patient activation based on the short form of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM13) were compared to standard care in a 6-month follow-up. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated using a sample of 80 patients in the intervention group and 57 patients in the control group; thus, a total of 137 patients were included in the final analysis. Propensity-score matching was used to assess the sensitivity of the results to the possible attrition bias.

Results

Patient activation improved more in the intervention group but the effect was not statistically significant. The effect on cost of care was ambiguous; costs decreased by an average of €91 in the unadjusted model, but increased by €48 in the adjusted model. Due to the controversial results on cost, the unadjusted analysis showed an 89% probability of cost-effectiveness with no willingness to pay for increased patient activation, whereas in the adjusted sample, the probability of the portal being more cost-effective than care as usual exceeded 50% probability at a willingness to pay €700 per clinically significant increase in patient activation score. There was no marked short-term impact on health status based on the SF-36v2 measure.

Conclusions

Offering the possibility to substitute health care visits with less costly contacts using self-management tools did not seem to compromise the health status or treatment of chronic care patients. Patient activation increased, and this could be achieved with moderate costs in a short-term experiment. In the long term, increased activation is proposed to lead to better health outcomes and eventually cut down resource use. Future studies should assess the long-term effects of patient portals on patients’ health status and cost of care.