Dataset Information

Patient-initiated electronic health record amendment requests.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objective

Providing patients access to their medical records offers many potential benefits including identification and correction of errors. The process by which patients ask for changes to be made to their records is called an 'amendment request'. Little is known about the nature of such amendment requests and whether they result in modifications to the chart.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative content analysis of all patient-initiated amendment requests that our institution received over a 7-year period. Recurring themes were identified along three analytic dimensions: (1) clinical/documentation area, (2) patient motivation for making the request, and (3) outcome of the request.

Results

The dataset consisted of 818 distinct requests submitted by 181 patients. The majority of these requests (n=636, 77.8%) were made to rectify incorrect information and 49.7% of all requests were ultimately approved. In 6.6% of the requests, patients wanted valid information removed from their record, 27.8% of which were approved. Among all of the patients requesting a copy of their chart, only a very small percentage (approximately 0.2%) submitted an amendment request.

Conclusions

The low number of amendment requests may be due to inadequate awareness by patients about how to make changes to their records. To make this approach effective, it will be important to inform patients of their right to view and amend records and about the process for doing so. Increasing patient access to medical records could encourage patient participation in improving the accuracy of medical records; however, caution should be used.

SUBMITTER: Hanauer DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4215043 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient-initiated electronic health record amendment requests.

Hanauer David A DA Preib Rebecca R Zheng Kai K Choi Sung W SW

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20140526 6

<h4>Background and objective</h4>Providing patients access to their medical records offers many potential benefits including identification and correction of errors. The process by which patients ask for changes to be made to their records is called an 'amendment request'. Little is known about the nature of such amendment requests and whether they result in modifications to the chart.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a qualitative content analysis of all patient-initiated amendment requests that our ...[more]

PMID: 24863430

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ObjectiveA recent Institute of Medicine report called for attention to safety issues related to electronic health records (EHRs). We analyzed EHR-related safety concerns reported within a large, integrated healthcare system.MethodsThe Informatics Patient Safety Office of the Veterans Health Administration (VA) maintains a non-punitive, voluntary reporting system to collect and investigate EHR-related safety concerns (ie, adverse events, potential events, and near misses). We analyzed completed investigations using an eight-dimension sociotechnical conceptual model that accounted for both technical and non-technical dimensions of safety. Using the framework analysis approach to qualitative data, we identified emergent and recurring safety concerns common to multiple reports.ResultsWe extracted 100 consecutive, unique, closed investigations between August 2009 and May 2013 from 344 reported incidents. Seventy-four involved unsafe technology and 25 involved unsafe use of technology. A majority (70%) involved two or more model dimensions. Most often, non-technical dimensions such as workflow, policies, and personnel interacted in a complex fashion with technical dimensions such as software/hardware, content, and user interface to produce safety concerns. Most (94%) safety concerns related to either unmet data-display needs in the EHR (ie, displayed information available to the end user failed to reduce uncertainty or led to increased potential for patient harm), software upgrades or modifications, data transmission between components of the EHR, or 'hidden dependencies' within the EHR.DiscussionEHR-related safety concerns involving both unsafe technology and unsafe use of technology persist long after 'go-live' and despite the sophisticated EHR infrastructure represented in our data source. Currently, few healthcare institutions have reporting and analysis capabilities similar to the VA.ConclusionsBecause EHR-related safety concerns have complex sociotechnical origins, institutions with long-standing as well as recent EHR implementations should build a robust infrastructure to monitor and learn from them.

Project description:Electronic health record (EHR) patient portals allow individuals to access their medical information with the intent of patient empowerment. However, little is known about portal use in nephrology patients. We addressed this gap by characterizing adoption of an EHR portal, assessing secular trends, and examining the association of portal adoption and BP control (<140/90 mmHg).Patients seen between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012, at any of four university-affiliated nephrology offices who had at least one additional nephrology follow-up visit before June 30, 2013, were included. Sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, clinical measurements, and office visits were abstracted from the EHR. Neighborhood median household income was obtained from the American Community Survey 2012.Of 2803 patients, 1098 (39%) accessed the portal. Over 87% of users reviewed laboratory results, 85% reviewed their medical information (e.g., medical history), 85% reviewed or altered appointments, 77% reviewed medications, 65% requested medication refills, and 31% requested medical advice from their renal provider. In adjusted models, older age, African-American race (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.39 to 0.64), Medicaid status (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.77), and lower neighborhood median household income were associated with not accessing the portal. Portal adoption increased over time (2011 versus 2010: OR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.09 to 1.75]; 2012 versus 2010: OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.44 to 2.64]). Portal adoption was correlated with BP control in patients with a diagnosis of hypertension; however, in the fully adjusted model this was somewhat attenuated and no longer statistically significant (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.24).While portal adoption appears to be increasing, greater attention is needed to understand why vulnerable populations do not access it. Future research should examine barriers to the use of e-health technologies in underserved patients with CKD, interventions to address them, and their potential to improve outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundIt is assumed that the implementation of health information technology introduces new vulnerabilities within a complex sociotechnical health care system, but no international consensus exists on a standardized format for enhancing the collection, analysis, and interpretation of technology-induced errors.ObjectiveThis study aims to develop a classification for patient safety incident reporting associated with the use of mature electronic health records (EHRs). It also aims to validate the classification by using a data set of incidents during a 6-month period immediately after the implementation of a new EHR system.MethodsThe starting point of the classification development was the Finnish Technology-Induced Error Risk Assessment Scale tool, based on research on commonly recognized error types. A multiprofessional research team used iterative tests on consensus building to develop a classification system. The final classification, with preliminary descriptions of classes, was validated by applying it to analyze EHR-related error incidents (n=428) during the implementation phase of a new EHR system and also to evaluate this classification's characteristics and applicability for reporting incidents. Interrater agreement was applied.ResultsThe number of EHR-related patient safety incidents during the implementation period (n=501) was five-fold when compared with the preimplementation period (n=82). The literature identified new error types that were added to the emerging classification. Error types were adapted iteratively after several test rounds to develop a classification for reporting patient safety incidents in the clinical use of a high-maturity EHR system. Of the 427 classified patient safety incidents, interface problems accounted for 96 (22.5%) incident reports, usability problems for 73 (17.1%), documentation problems for 60 (14.1%), and clinical workflow problems for 33 (7.7%). Altogether, 20.8% (89/427) of reports were related to medication section problems, and downtime problems were rare (n=8). During the classification work, 14.8% (74/501) of reports of the original sample were rejected because of insufficient information, even though the reports were deemed to be related to EHRs. The interrater agreement during the blinded review was 97.7%.ConclusionsThis study presents a new classification for EHR-related patient safety incidents applicable to mature EHRs. The number of EHR-related patient safety incidents during the implementation period may reflect patient safety challenges during the implementation of a new type of high-maturity EHR system. The results indicate that the types of errors previously identified in the literature change with the EHR development cycle.

Dataset Information

Patient-initiated electronic health record amendment requests.

Background and objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Patient-initiated electronic health record amendment requests.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure