Engaging primary care patients to use a patient-centered personal health record.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Krist AH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4157978 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep-Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Engaging primary care patients to use a patient-centered personal health record.
Krist Alex H AH Woolf Steven H SH Bello Ghalib A GA Sabo Roy T RT Longo Daniel R DR Kashiri Paulette P Etz Rebecca S RS Loomis John J Rothemich Stephen F SF Peele J Eric JE Cohn Jeffrey J
Annals of family medicine 20140901 5
<h4>Purpose</h4>Health care leaders encourage clinicians to offer portals that enable patients to access personal health records, but implementation has been a challenge. Although large integrated health systems have promoted use through costly advertising campaigns, other implementation methods are needed for small to medium-sized practices where most patients receive their care.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a mixed methods assessment of a proactive implementation strategy for a patient portal ( ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Evidence-based preventive services offer profound health benefits, yet Americans receive only half of indicated care. A variety of government and specialty society policy initiatives are promoting the adoption of information technologies to engage patients in their care, such as personal health records, but current systems may not utilize the technology's full potential.Using a previously described model to make information technology more patient-centered, we developed an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) designed to more deeply engage patients in preventive care and health promotion. We recruited 14 primary care practices to promote the IPHR to all adult patients and sought practice and patient input in designing the IPHR to ensure its usability, salience, and generalizability. The input involved patient usability tests, practice workflow observations, learning collaboratives, and patient feedback. Use of the IPHR was measured using practice appointment and IPHR databases.The IPHR that emerged from this process generates tailored patient recommendations based on guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and other organizations. It extracts clinical data from the practices' electronic medical record and obtains health risk assessment information from patients. Clinical content is translated and explained in lay language. Recommendations review the benefits and uncertainties of services and possible actions for patients and clinicians. Embedded in recommendations are self management tools, risk calculators, decision aids, and community resources--selected to match patient's clinical circumstances. Within six months, practices had encouraged 14.4% of patients to use the IPHR (ranging from 1.5% to 28.3% across the 14 practices). Practices successfully incorporated the IPHR into workflow, using it to prepare patients for visits, augment health behavior counseling, explain test results, automatically issue patient reminders for overdue services, prompt clinicians about needed services, and formulate personalized prevention plans.The IPHR demonstrates that a patient-centered personal health record that interfaces with the electronic medical record can give patients a high level of individualized guidance and be successfully adopted by busy primary care practices. Further study and refinement are necessary to make information systems even more patient-centered and to demonstrate their impact on care.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00589173.
| S-EPMC3250934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWorldwide, patient-centered care is becoming a widely used concept in medical practice, getting more and more attention because of its proven ability to improve quality of care and reduce costs. Although several studies show that patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) influence certain aspects of patient-centered care, the possible contribution of PAEHR implementation to patient-centered care as a comprehensive concept has not, to our knowledge, been structurally evaluated to date.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to review whether and how the use of PAEHRs contributes to patient-centered care both in general and among specific population groups.MethodsWe followed PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. We identified literature in 5 databases, using the terms "patient-accessible medical records," "patient experiences," and "professional experiences" as key concepts. A total of 49 articles were included and analyzed with a charting code list containing 10 elements of patient-centered care.ResultsStudies were diverse in design, country of origin, functionalities of the investigated PAEHR, and target population. Participants in all studies were adults. Most studies reported positive influence of PAEHR use on patient-centered care; patient accessible health records were appreciated for their opportunity to empower patients, inform patients about their health, and involve patients in their own care. There were mixed results for the extent to which PAEHRs affected the relation between patients and clinicians. Professionals and patients in mental health care held opposing views concerning the impact of transparency, where professionals appeared more worried about potential negative impact of PAEHRs on the patient-clinician relationship. Their worries seemed to be influenced by a reluctant attitude toward patient-centered care. Disadvantaged groups appeared to have less access to and make less use of patient-accessible records than the average population but experienced more benefits than the average population when they actually used PAEHRs.ConclusionsThe review indicates that PAEHRs bear the potential to positively contribute to patient-centered care. However, concerns from professionals about the impact of transparency on the patient-clinician relationship as well as the importance of a patient-centered attitude need to be addressed. Potentially significant benefits for disadvantaged groups will be achieved only through easily accessible and user-friendly PAEHRs.
| S-EPMC7834934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale & objectiveElectronic health record portals are increasingly emphasized in chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, associations of portal use with clinical and patient-centered outcomes remain unknown.Study designCross-sectional survey (April 2015 to March 2018).Setting & participantsNondialysis patients with CKD from nephrology clinics within 1 academic medical center.ExposuresPatient demographics (age, sex, race, ethnicity, education, and income), kidney function.OutcomesAssociation between portal use as an outcome and exposures. Additionally, associations of portal use and patient demographics with 4 patient-centered outcomes (CKD-specific knowledge, stress, and 2 self-ratings of health).Analytic approachLogistic regression to examine associations between patient portal use, demographics, and kidney function. Linear regression to examine associations between portal use and patient-centered outcomes.ResultsOf 245 participants, mean age was 60 ± 17 (SD) years, 182 (77%) were White, 121 (49%) were women, 230 (96%) had a high school education or higher, and 96 (45%) had <$50,000 annual income. Examining portal use, 159 (65%) used the portal as follows: checking laboratory test results, 157 (99%); managing appointments, 133 (84%); messaging providers, 131 (82%); viewing medical history, 127 (80%); reviewing educational resources, 113 (71%); and renewing prescriptions, 98 (62%). African Americans (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16-0.72 vs White patients), patients with less formal education (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.36), and those with lower income (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13-0.60; and OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12-0.54 comparing income < $25,000 and $25,000-$50,000, respectively, with ≥$50,000) had lower odds of using the portal. In adjusted analysis, only lower income predicted lower portal use. Examining patient-centered outcomes in univariable analysis, portal users had higher knowledge (β = 4.89; P = 0.02), higher ratings of current health (β = 0.28; P = 0.03), and lower CKD-related stress (β = -0.18; P = 0.05). In adjusted analysis, only patient demographics and/or kidney function remained independent predictors of patient-centered outcomes.LimitationsCross-sectional study design, cannot determine causality.ConclusionsInterventions are needed to ensure that all patients have access to portals to mitigate disparities in care.
| S-EPMC8039427 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model has several components to improve care for patients with high comorbidity, including greater access to face-to-face primary care.ObjectiveWe examined whether high-comorbidity patients had larger increases in primary care provider (PCP) visits attributable to PCMH implementation in a large integrated health system relative to other patients enrolled in primary care.Design, subjects and main measuresThis longitudinal study examined a 1 % random sample of 9.3 million patients enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) at any time between 2003 and 2013. Face-to-face visits with PCPs per quarter were identified through VHA administrative data. Comorbidity was measured using the Gagne index and patients with a weighted score of ≥ 2 were defined as high comorbidity. We applied interrupted time-series models to estimate marginal changes in PCP visits attributable to PCMH implementation. Differences in marginal changes were calculated across comorbidity groups (high vs. low). Analyses were stratified by age group to account for Medicare eligibility.Key resultsAmong age 65+ patients, PCMH was associated with greater PCP visits starting four and ten quarters following implementation for high- and low-comorbidity patients, respectively. Changes were larger for high-comorbidity patients (eight to 11 greater visits per 1000 patients per quarter). Among patients age < 65, PCMH was associated with greater visits for high-comorbidity patients starting eight quarters following implementation, but fewer visits for low-comorbidity patients in all quarters. The difference in visit changes across groups ranged from 18 to 67 visits per 1000 patients per quarter.ConclusionsIncreases in PCP visits attributable to PCMH were greater among patients with higher comorbidity. Health systems implementing PCMH should account for population-level comorbidity burden when planning for PCMH-related changes in PCP utilization.
| S-EPMC5130955 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Personal health record (PHR)-based health care management systems can improve patient engagement and data-driven medical diagnosis in a clinical setting.The purpose of this study was (1) to demonstrate the development of an electronic health record (EHR)-tethered PHR app named MyHealthKeeper, which can retrieve data from a wearable device and deliver these data to a hospital EHR system, and (2) to study the effectiveness of a PHR data-driven clinical intervention with clinical trial results.To improve the conventional EHR-tethered PHR, we ascertained clinicians' unmet needs regarding PHR functionality and the data frequently used in the field through a cocreation workshop. We incorporated the requirements into the system design and architecture of the MyHealthKeeper PHR module. We constructed the app and validated the effectiveness of the PHR module by conducting a 4-week clinical trial. We used a commercially available activity tracker (Misfit) to collect individual physical activity data, and developed the MyHealthKeeper mobile phone app to record participants' patterns of daily food intake and activity logs. We randomly assigned 80 participants to either the PHR-based intervention group (n=51) or the control group (n=29). All of the study participants completed a paper-based survey, a laboratory test, a physical examination, and an opinion interview. During the 4-week study period, we collected health-related mobile data, and study participants visited the outpatient clinic twice and received PHR-based clinical diagnosis and recommendations.A total of 68 participants (44 in the intervention group and 24 in the control group) completed the study. The PHR intervention group showed significantly higher weight loss than the control group (mean 1.4 kg, 95% CI 0.9-1.9; P<.001) at the final week (week 4). In addition, triglyceride levels were significantly lower by the end of the study period (mean 2.59 mmol/L, 95% CI 17.6-75.8; P=.002).We developed an innovative EHR-tethered PHR system that allowed clinicians and patients to share lifelog data. This study shows the effectiveness of a patient-managed and clinician-guided health tracker system and its potential to improve patient clinical profiles.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03200119; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03200119 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6v01HaCdd).
| S-EPMC5740264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundElectronic health records are now widely adopted in medical and behavioral health settings. While they have the potential to improve the quality of care, the research findings on their impact on clinical practice and outcomes have been mixed. This study explores how the electronic health record and its stage of development influenced the implementation of person-centered care planning in community mental health clinics.MethodsThe study was set in five community mental health clinics which utilized an EHR and had been trained in person-centered care planning. Using an objective quantitative measure of fidelity, the study examined fidelity to PCCP across time and by stage of EHR development. Data from focus groups, interviews with clinic leaders and consultant reports was analyzed to explore the process of implementation and the role of the electronic health record.ResultsAll clinics demonstrated an overall increase in PCCP fidelity at the conclusion of the study period but there were significant differences in PCCP fidelity among clinics with EHRs in different stages of development. Electronic health records emerged as a significant implementation factor in the qualitative data with clinics being unable to individualize service plans and encountering technical difficulties. Barriers to person-centered care included drop-down boxes and pre-determined outcomes. Clinic responses included customizing their record or developing workarounds.ConclusionsThe study demonstrated the need to align the electronic health record with a person-centered approach which includes individualizing information and orienting service plans to personal life goals. The ability of clinics to be able to customize their records and balance the need for unique and aggregate information in the record is critical to improve both the provider experience and the quality of care.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov , NCT02299492 , registered on November 24, 2014.
| S-EPMC6704707 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims
The Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) has funded the development of a patient controlled “Personal Electronic Health Record” (PEPA) as part of their current INFOPAT project. PEPA allows for the exchange of medical data between all interested groups, including the patients thenselves. A PEPA contains medical reports and findings including, for example, x-rays, CT scans and MRIs. The patients can safeguard their information and access all content. The aim of this study is to test the PEPA-prototype for cancer patients being treated at the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) in Heidelberg.
Who can participate?
Adult colorectal cancer patients being treated at the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) in Heidelberg.
What does the study involve?
There are two part to this study. The first part involves focus groups, in which a group of people are asked their opinion and attitudes towards, for example, an idea, product or service. Here, focus groups are set up that involve the patients, doctors and other health professionals to discuss current problems with the coordination of care offered to cancer patients, as well as discuss what people want to get from using PEPA (i.e. user requirements). The PEPA-prototype is then developed taking into account the conclusions from the focus groups. In the second part of the study, patients are encouraged to use the PEPA-prototype to prepare and follow up meetings with their physicians.
| 2424890 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Demand is emerging for personal health records (PHRs), a patient-centric digital tool for engaging in shared decision-making and healthcare data management. This study uses a RE-AIM framework to explore rural patients and providers' perceptions prior to and following implementation of a PHR. Health care providers and their patients were recruited from early-adopter patient medical home clinics and a local patient advisory group. Focus groups were used to explore patient and provider pre-implementation perceptions of PHRs and post-implementation provider perspectives. Patients were invited through participating clinics to use the PHR. An implementation process evaluation was conducted. Multiple methods and data sources were used and included pre-/post-intervention patient surveys, provider interviews, and PHR/EHR administrative data. Both patient and provider focus groups described PHRs as providing a comprehensive health story and enhanced communication. Patients prioritized collection of health promotion data while providers endorsed health-related, clinical data. Both groups expressed the need for managing expectations and setting boundaries on PHR use. The evaluation indicated Reach: 16% of targeted patients participated and an additional 127 patients used the PHR as a tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Effectiveness: Patient satisfaction with use was neutral, with no significant changes to quality of life, self-efficacy, or patients' activation. Adoption: 44% of eligible clinics participated, primarily those operated publicly versus privately, in smaller communities, and farther from a regional hospital. Implementation: Despite system interoperability expectations, at time of roll out, information exchange standards had not been reached. Additional implementation complications arose from the onset of the pandemic. One clinic on-boarded additional patients resulting in a rapid spike in PHR use. Maintenance: All clinics discontinued PHR within the study period, citing several key barriers to use. RE-AIM offers a valuable process evaluation framework for a comprehensive depiction of impact, and how to drive future success. Interoperability, patient agency and control, and provider training and support are critical obstacles to overcome in PHR implementation.
| S-EPMC11207137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Engaging health care staff in new quality improvement programs is challenging.We developed 2 virtual patient (VP) avatars in the context of a clinic-level quality improvement program. We sought to determine differences in preferences for VPs and the perceived influence of interacting with the VP on clinical staff engagement with the quality improvement program.Using a participatory design approach, we developed an older male smoker VP and a younger female smoker VP. The older male smoker was described as a patient with cardiovascular disease and was ethnically ambiguous. The female patient was younger and was worried about the impact of smoking on her pregnancy. Clinical staff were allowed to choose the VP they preferred, and the more they engaged with the VP, the more likely the VP was to quit smoking and become healthier. We deployed the VP within the context of a quality improvement program designed to encourage clinical staff to refer their patients who smoke to a patient-centered Web-assisted tobacco intervention. To evaluate the VPs, we used quantitative analyses using multivariate models of provider and practice characteristics and VP characteristic preference and analyses of a brief survey of positive deviants (clinical staff in practices with high rates of encouraging patients to use the quit smoking innovation).A total of 146 clinical staff from 76 primary care practices interacted with the VPs. Clinic staff included medical providers (35/146, 24.0%), nurse professionals (19/146, 13.0%), primary care technicians (5/146, 3.4%), managerial staff (67/146, 45.9%), and receptionists (20/146, 13.7%). Medical staff were mostly male, and other roles were mostly female. Medical providers (OR 0.031; CI 0.003-0.281; P=.002) and younger staff (OR 0.411; CI 0.177-0.952; P=.038) were less likely to choose the younger, female VP when controlling for all other characteristics. VP preference did not influence online patient referrals by staff. In high-performing practices that referred 20 or more smokers to the ePortal (13/76), the majority of clinic staff were motivated by or liked the virtual patient (20/26, 77%).Medical providers are more likely motivated by VPs that are similar to their patient population, while nurses and other staff may prefer avatars that are more similar to them.
| S-EPMC5332834 | biostudies-other
Project description:There is growing interest in developing systems to overcome barriers for acquiring and interpreting family health histories in primary care.To examine the capacity of three different electronic portals to collect family history from patients and deposit valid data in an electronic health record (EHR).Pilot trial.Patients were enrolled from four primary care practices and were asked to collect family health history before a physical exam using either telephone-based interactive voice response (IVR) technology, a secure Internet portal, or a waiting room laptop computer, with portal assigned by practice. Intervention practices were compared to a "usual care" practice, where there was no standard workflow to document family history (663 participants in the three intervention arms were compared to 296 participants from the control practice).New documentation of any family history in a coded EHR field within 30 days of the visit. Secondary outcomes included participation rates and validity.Demographics varied by clinic. Documentation of new family history data was significantly higher, but modest, in each of the three intervention clinics (7.5 % for IVR clinic, 20.3 % for laptop clinic, and 23.1 % for patient portal clinic) versus the control clinic (1.7 %). Patient-entered data on common conditions in first degree relatives was confirmed as valid by a genetic counselor for the majority of cases (ranging from 64 to 82 % in the different arms).Within primary care practices, valid patient entered family health history data can be obtained electronically at higher rates than a standard of care that depends on provider-entered data. Further research is needed to determine how best to match different portals to individual patient preference, how the tools can best be integrated with provider workflow, and to assess how they impact the use of screening and prevention.
| S-EPMC3832728 | biostudies-literature