PDF herunterladen
Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12(05): 1110-1119
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740189
Special Section on Disparities, Biases, and Disinformation in Health Care

Revisiting Provider Role in Patient Use of Online Medical Records

Surma Mukhopadhyay
1   Independent Researcher, Durham, North Carolina, United States
,
Ramsankar Basak
2   University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
,
Saif Khairat
3   Carolina Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
,
Timothy J. Carney
2   University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objectives Provider encouragement for patient use of online medical record (OMR) systems is poorly understood. The study examines temporal trends and predictors of provider encouragement and the effects of encouragement on OMR use.

Methods Health Information National Trends Survey administered in 2017 and 2020 were used. Subjects were 18 to 75 years old with access to the Internet or smart devices. From 2017 and 2020, 2,558 and 3,058 subjects were included, respectively.

Results In 2020, 52.8% reported receiving provider encouragement within the last year for OMR use compared with 41.3% in 2017 (p < 0.001). For respondents with chronic diseases (such as diabetes, hypertension, heart, or lung diseases [CVMD]), encouragement increased from 45.5 to 57.2% (p < 0.001). Sociodemographic determinants and clinical attributes (e.g., provider office visits, cancer history, or CVMDs) significantly (p < 0.05) predicted encouragement. Among CVMD subjects, gender and visit frequency were significant predictors. OMR use within a year grew recently (73.3% in 2020 vs. 60.6% in 2017, p = 0.002) among CVMD subjects reporting encouragement. Provider encouragement was associated (p < 0.05) with secure communication and viewing results using OMRs controlling for other predictors in the overall cohort and among CVMD subjects.

Conclusion Many respondents reported not receiving provider encouragement for OMR use. These subjects represent millions of U.S. adults, including those participating during the pandemic, with CVMDs or cancer history. Encouragement rates grew over time and was associated with demographic or disease attributes and with OMR use. Future research should assess the optimality of encouragement. Resources enabling provider encouragement should continue and help prevent disparity in health technology use.

Keywords

physician - online medical records - patient portal - facilitators and barriers - disparity - public health - health policy

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

This study utilized a publicly available data source provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The data do not contain any information that can be used to identify subjects and harm subjects in any way. Furthermore, results are presented only in aggregated forms.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 26. Juli 2021

Angenommen: 05. Oktober 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
15. Dezember 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Goldzweig CL, Orshansky G, Paige NM. et al. Electronic patient portals: evidence on health outcomes, satisfaction, efficiency, and attitudes: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2013; 159 (10) 677-687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Heath S. Low Patient Portal Adoption Could Stymie COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout. Accessed June 1, 2021 at: https://patientengagementhit.com/news/low-patient-portal-adoption-could-stymie-covid-19-vaccine-rollout
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lyles CR, Nelson EC, Frampton S, Dykes PC, Cemballi AG, Sarkar U. Using electronic health record portals to improve patient engagement: research priorities and best practices. Ann Intern Med 2020; 172 (11, Suppl): S123-S129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hong YA, Jiang S, Liu PL. Use of patient portals of electronic health records remains low from 2014 to 2018: results from a national survey and policy implications. Am J Health Promot 2020; 34 (06) 677-680
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Abd-Alrazaq AA, Bewick BM, Farragher T, Gardner P. Factors that affect the use of electronic personal health records among patients: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 2019; 126: 164-175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 McAlearney AS, Gaughan A, MacEwan SR, Fareed N, Huerta TR. Improving acceptance of inpatient portals: patients' and care team members' perspectives. Telemed J E Health 2020; 26 (03) 310-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Walker DM, Hefner JL, Fareed N, Huerta TR, McAlearney AS. Exploring the digital divide: age and race disparities in use of an inpatient OMR. Telemed J E Health 2020; 26 (05) 603-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Nahm ES, Zhu S, Bellantoni M. et al. Patient portal use among older adults: what is really happening nationwide?. J Appl Gerontol 2020; 39 (04) 442-450
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ancker JS, Barrón Y, Rockoff ML. et al. Use of an electronic patient portal among disadvantaged populations. J Gen Intern Med 2011; 26 (10) 1117-1123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Niazkhani Z, Toni E, Cheshmekaboodi M, Georgiou A, Pirnejad H. Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2020; 20 (01) 153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Zhong X, Park J, Liang M. et al. Characteristics of patients using different patient portal functions and the impact on primary care service utilization and appointment adherence: retrospective observational study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22 (02) e14410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Shah SD, Liebovitz D. It takes two to tango: engaging patients and providers with portals. PM R 2017; 9 (5S): S85-S97
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 de Lusignan S, Mold F, Sheikh A. et al. Patients' online access to their electronic health records and linked online services: a systematic interpretative review. BMJ Open 2014; 4 (09) e006021
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Zhao JY, Song B, Anand E. et al. Barriers, facilitators, and solutions to optimal patient portal and personal health record use: a systematic review of the literature. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2018; 2017: 1913-1922
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wade-Vuturo AE, Mayberry LS, Osborn CY. Secure messaging and diabetes management: experiences and perspectives of patient portal users. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 (03) 519-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Urowitz S, Wiljer D, Dupak K. et al. Improving diabetes management with a patient portal: a qualitative study of diabetes self-management portal. J Med Internet Res 2012; 14 (06) e158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ryan BL, Brown JB, Terry A, Cejic S, Stewart M, Thind A. Implementing and using a patient portal: a qualitative exploration of patient and provider perspectives on engaging patients. J Innov Health Inform 2016; 23 (02) 848
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lee JL, Rawl SM, Dickinson S. et al. Communication about health information technology use between patients and providers. J Gen Intern Med 2020; 35 (09) 2614-2620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shimoga SV, Lu YZ. Role of provider encouragement on patient engagement via online portals. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2019; 26 (10) 968-976
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Powell KR. Patient-perceived facilitators of and barriers to electronic portal use: a systematic review. Comput Inform Nurs 2017; 35 (11) 565-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Internet World Stats. World internet users statistics and 2019 world population stats. Published November 6, 2019. Accessed June 1, 2021 at: https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Boersma P, Black LI, Ward BW. Prevalence of multiple chronic conditions among US adults, 2018. Prev Chronic Dis 2020; 17: E106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 National Cancer Institute. About the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Accessed March 31, 2021 at: https://hints.cancer.gov/about-hints/learn-more-about-hints.aspx
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wildevuur SE, Simonse LW. Information and communication technology-enabled person-centered care for the “big five” chronic conditions: scoping review. J Med Internet Res 2015; 17 (03) e77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Soni A. Top 10 Most Costly Conditions among Men and Women, 2008: Estimates for the U.S. Civilian Noninstitutionalized Adult Population, Age 18 and Older, STATISTICAL BRIEF #331 July 2011. Accessed June 1, 2021 at: https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_files/publications/st331/stat331.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Stage 3 ProgramRequirements for Providers Attesting to their State's Medicaid Promoting Interoperability (PI) Programs. . Accessed June 1, 2021 at: https://www.cms.gov/Regulationsand-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/Stage3Medicaid_Require
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Nahm ES, Resnick B, Brown C. et al. The effects of an online theory-based bone health program for older adults. J Appl Gerontol 2017; 36 (09) 1117-1144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Turner K, Hong YR, Yadav S, Huo J, Mainous AG. Patient portal utilization: before and after stage 2 electronic health record meaningful use. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2019; 26 (10) 960-967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Antonio MG, Petrovskaya O, Lau F. The state of evidence in patient portals: umbrella review. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22 (11) e23851 DOI: 10.2196/23851.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Hardeman RR, Medina EM, Kozhimannil KB. Dismantling structural racism, supporting black lives and achieving health equity: our role. N Engl J Med 2016; 375 (22) 2113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Miller Jr DP, Latulipe C, Melius KA, Quandt SA, Arcury TA. Primary care providers' views of patient portals: interview study of perceived benefits and consequences. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18 (01) e8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Health and Human Services Department. 21st Century Cures Act: Interoperability, Information Blocking, and the ONC Health IT Certification Program. Accessed June 1, 2021 at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-07419
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Steitz BD, Wong JIS, Cobb JG, Carlson B, Smith G, Rosenbloom ST. Policies and procedures governing patient portal use at an Academic Medical Center. JAMIA Open 2019; 2 (04) 479-488
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Bergmo TS, Kummervold PE, Gammon D, Dahl LB. Electronic patient-provider communication: will it offset office visits and telephone consultations in primary care?. Int J Med Inform 2005; 74 (09) 705-710
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Healthy People 2030. Health IT Objectives - HC/HIT-D09. Accessed September 1, 2021 at: https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/health-it
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Grossman LV, Masterson Creber RM, Ancker JS. et al. Technology access, technical assistance, and disparities in inpatient portal use. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (01) 40-50
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Reed ME, Huang J, Millman A. et al. Portal use among patients with chronic conditions: patient-reported care experiences. Med Care 2019; 57 (10) 809-814
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hsiao V, Chandereng T, Lankton RL. et al. Disparities in telemedicine access: a cross-sectional study of a newly established infrastructure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Appl Clin Inform 2021; 12 (03) 445-458
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Crotty BH, Winn AN, Asan O, Nagavally S, Walker RJ, Egede LE. Clinician encouragement and online health record usage. J Gen Intern Med 2019; 34 (11) 2345-2347
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar