Dataset Information

Patient Portal Implementation and Uptake: Qualitative Comparative Case Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Giving patients access to their health information is a provincial and national goal, and it is critical to the delivery of patient-centered care. With this shift, patient portals have become more prevalent. In Alberta, the Alberta Health Services piloted a portal (MyChart). There was a need to identify factors that promoted the use of this portal. Furthermore, it was imperative to understand why there was variability in uptake within the various clinics that participated in the pilot.

Objective

This study aims to identify potential factors that could improve the uptake of MyChart from the perspectives of both users and nonusers at pilot sites. We focused on factors that promoted the use of MyChart along with related benefits and barriers to its use, with the intention that this information could be incorporated into the plan for its province-wide implementation.

Methods

A qualitative comparative case study was conducted to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and initial perceptions of users and to identify ways to increase uptake. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 56 participants (27 patients, 21 providers, 4 nonmedical staff, and 4 clinic managers) from 5 clinics. Patients were asked about the impact of MyChart on their health and health care. Providers were asked about the impact on the patient-provider relationship and workflow. Managers were asked about barriers to implementation. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and entered into NVivo. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.

Results

Results from a comparison of factors related to uptake of MyChart in 5 clinics (2 clinics with high uptake, 1 with moderate uptake, 1 with low uptake, and 1 with no uptake) are reported. Some theoretical constructs in our study, such as intention to use, perceived value, similarity (novelty) of the technology, and patient health needs, were similar to findings published by other research teams. We also identified some new factors associated with uptake, including satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the current status quo, performance expectancy, facilitating conditions, behavioral intentions, and use behavior. All these factors had an impact on the level of uptake in each setting and created different opportunities for end users.

Conclusions

There is limited research on factors that influence the uptake of patient portals. We identified some factors that were consistent with those reported by others but also several new factors that were associated with the update of MyChart, a new patient portal, in the clinics we studied. On the basis of our results, we posit that a shared understanding of the technology among patients, clinicians, and managers, along with dissatisfaction with nonportal-based communications, is foundational and must be addressed for patient portals to support improvements in care.

SUBMITTER: Avdagovska M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7427986 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The number of patient portals is rising, and although portals can have positive effects, their implementation has major impacts on the providing health care institutions. However, little is known about the organizational factors affecting successful implementation. Knowledge of the specific barriers to and facilitators of various stakeholders is likely to be useful for future implementations. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to identify the barriers to and facilitators of patient portal implementation facing various stakeholders within hospital organizations in the Netherlands. METHODS:Purposive sampling was used to select hospitals of various types. A total of 2 university medical centers, 3 teaching hospitals, and 2 general hospitals were included. For each, 3 stakeholders were interviewed: (1) medical professionals, (2) managers, and (3) information technology employees. In total, 21 semistructured interviews were conducted using the Grol and Wensing model, which describes barriers to and facilitators of change in health care practice at 6 levels: (1) innovation; (2) individual professional; (3) patient; (4) social context; (5) organizational context; and (6) economic and political context. Two researchers independently selected and coded quotes by applying this model using a (deductive) directed content approach. Additional factors related to technical and portal characteristics were added using the model of McGinn et al, developed for implementation of electronic health records. RESULTS:In total, we identified 376 quotes, 26 barriers, and 28 facilitators. Thirteen barriers and 12 facilitators were common for all stakeholder groups. The facilitators' perceived usefulness (especially less paperwork) was mentioned by all the stakeholders, followed by subjects' positive attitude. The main barriers were lack of resources (namely, lack of staff and materials), financial difficulties (especially complying with high costs, lack of reimbursements), and guaranteeing privacy and security (eg, strict regulations). Both similarities and differences were found between stakeholder groups and hospital types. For example, managers and information technology employees mainly considered guaranteeing privacy and security as a predominant barrier. Financial difficulties were particularly mentioned by medical professionals and managers. CONCLUSIONS:Patient portal implementation is a complex process and is not only a technical process but also affects the organization and its staff. Barriers and facilitators occurred at various levels and differed among hospital types (eg, lack of accessibility) and stakeholder groups (eg, sufficient resources) in terms of several factors. Our findings underscore the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in portal implementations. We identified a set of barriers and facilitators that are likely to be useful in making strategic and efficient implementation plans.

Project description:BackgroundPatient 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.ObjectiveThe 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)?MethodsThe 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.ResultsSearches will be conducted in September 2019, and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2020.ConclusionsThis 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 registrationInternational 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.

Project description:BackgroundRemote patient monitoring (RPM) technologies can support patients living with chronic conditions through self-monitoring of physiological measures and enhance clinicians' diagnostic and treatment decisions. However, to date, large-scale pragmatic RPM implementation within health systems has been limited, and understanding of the impacts of RPM technologies on clinical workflows and care experience is lacking.ObjectiveIn this study, we evaluate the early implementation of operational RPM initiatives for chronic disease management within the ambulatory network of an academic medical center in New York City, focusing on the experiences of "early adopter" clinicians and patients.MethodsUsing a multimethod qualitative approach, we conducted (1) interviews with 13 clinicians across 9 specialties considered as early adopters and supporters of RPM and (2) speculative design sessions exploring the future of RPM in clinical care with 21 patients and patient representatives, to better understand experiences, preferences, and expectations of pragmatic RPM use for health care delivery.ResultsWe identified themes relevant to RPM implementation within the following areas: (1) data collection and practices, including impacts of taking real-world measures and issues of data sharing, security, and privacy; (2) proactive and preventive care, including proactive and preventive monitoring, and proactive interventions and support; and (3) health disparities and equity, including tailored and flexible care and implicit bias. We also identified evidence for mitigation and support to address challenges in each of these areas.ConclusionsThis study highlights the unique contexts, perceptions, and challenges regarding the deployment of RPM in clinical practice, including its potential implications for clinical workflows and work experiences. Based on these findings, we offer implementation and design recommendations for health systems interested in deploying RPM-enabled health care.

Project description:BackgroundDigitalization of health care has opened up for new ways to involve and engage patients. With this, increased attention has been put on digital patient portals. There exists some research on patient portals for adolescent patients in general and for adults in mental health care. However, no studies on patient portals for adolescents in mental health care have been identified in a recent review. The aim was therefore to explore the views on using patient portals for adolescents in mental health care among persons involved in and/or being affected by the introduction of a patient portal.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted using individual semi-structured interviews with 14 persons who were healthcare providers in child and adolescent mental health care, young representatives from the user panel, or persons affiliated with an EHR-project introducing a patient portal. The main questions addressed their views on introducing patient portals for adolescents in mental health care and how patient portals and access to clinical notes can affect them and their treatment.ResultsThe findings were categorised into four main themes; "Does access to a patient portal help or harm adolescents?", "Who decides access?", "Mostly a political goal" and "Need for support and competency". Informants mentioned situations in which both adolescents' and parents' access to a patient portal could help adolescents in mental health care, but also where it could potentially harm their treatment and threaten confidentiality. Most informants thought that healthcare providers should have the autonomy to determine which information should be shared with whom, but also requested guidelines to ensure equal practice and support in difficult situations. Some perceived patient portals as the result of a political decision, rather than healthcare providers´ wishes, while others described it as a necessary development towards democratization.ConclusionThe informants' views varied from thinking that a patient portal could support adolescents in mental health care, to worrying that it could be detrimental to the treatment. Informants emphasized that the management should facilitate training and support for healthcare providers in using patient portals and telehealth.

Project description:The increasing presence of technology in health care has created new opportunities for patient engagement and with this, an intensified exploration of patient empowerment within the digital health context. While the use of technology, such as patient portals, has been positively received, a clear linkage between digital health solutions, patient empowerment, and health outcomes remains elusive.The primary objective of this research was to explore the views of participants enrolled in an electronic health record portal access trial regarding the resultant influence of this technology on their feelings of patient empowerment.The exploration of patient empowerment within a digital health context was done with participants in a tethered patient portal trial using interpretive description. Interpretive description is a qualitative methodology developed to pragmatically address clinical health questions. Patient demographics, self-reported health status, and self-identified technology adaptation contributed to the assessment of empowerment in this qualitative approach.This research produced a view of patient empowerment within the digital health context summarized in two overarching categories: (1) Being Heard and (2) Moving Forward. In each of these, two subcategories further delineate the aspects of empowerment, as viewed by these participants: Knowing More and Seeing What They See under Being Heard, and Owning Future Steps and Promoting Future Care under Moving Forward. This work also highlighted an ongoing interconnectedness between the concepts of patient empowerment, engagement, and activation and the need to further articulate the unique aspects of each of these.The results of this study contribute needed patient voice to the ongoing evolution of the concept of patient empowerment. In order to move toward more concrete and accurate measure of patient empowerment and engagement in digital health, there must be further consideration of what patients themselves identify as essential aspects of these complex concepts. This research has revealed relational and informational elements as two key areas of focus in the ongoing evolution of patient empowerment operationalization and measure.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic patient portals have become common and offer many potential benefits for patients' self-management of health care. These benefits could be especially important for older adult patients dealing with significant chronic illness, many of whom have caregivers, such as a spouse, adult child, or other family member or friend, who help with health care management. Patient portals commonly contain large amounts of personal information, including diagnoses, health histories, medications, specialist appointments, lab results, and billing and insurance information. Some health care systems provide proxy accounts for caregivers to access a portal on behalf of a patient. It is not well known how much and in what way caregivers are using patient portals on behalf of patients and whether patients see any information disclosure risks associated with such access.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine how older adult patients perceive the benefits and risks of proxy patient portal access by their caregivers.MethodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with 10 older adult patients with chronic illness. We asked them about their relationship with their caregivers, their use of their patient portal, their caregiver's use of the portal, and their perceptions about the benefits and risks of their caregiver's use of the portals. We also asked them about their comfort level with caregivers having access to information about a hypothetical diagnosis of a stigmatized condition. Two investigators conducted a thematic analysis of the qualitative data.ResultsAll patients identified caregivers. Some had given caregivers access to their portals, in all cases by sharing log-in credentials, rather than by setting up an official proxy account. Patients generally saw benefits in their caregivers having access to the information and functions provided by the portal. Patients generally reported that they would be uncomfortable with caregivers learning of stigmatized conditions and also with caregivers (except spouses) accessing financial billing information.ConclusionsPatients share their electronic patient portal credentials with caregivers to receive the benefits of those caregivers having access to important medical information but are unaware of all the information those caregivers can access. Better portal design could alleviate these unwanted information disclosures.