27 hours ago Dec 02, 2021 · There are two main types of patient portals: a standalone system and an integrated service. Integrated patient portal software functionality usually comes as a part of an EMR system, an EHR system or practice management software. But at their most basic, they’re simply web-based tools. >> Go To The Portal
Beyond access control, patient portals typically include features that allow patients to view: Recent Doctor Visits Discharge Summaries Lab Results Medication Lists Immunization Records Allergy Information
Dec 02, 2021 · There are two main types of patient portals: a standalone system and an integrated service. Integrated patient portal software functionality usually comes as a part of an EMR system, an EHR system or practice management software. But at their most basic, they’re simply web-based tools.
Jul 02, 2020 · EHRs typically contain the same basic information you would put in a PHR, such as your date of birth, medication list and drug allergies. But EHRs contain more extensive information because they're used by health care providers to store visit notes, test results and much more. A PHR that is tied to an EHR is called a patient portal.
“Patient portals allow us to communicate effectively and promptly with our referring physicians by exchanging information and test results. These tests or chart notes can then be imported into a patient’s electronic record, where they will be permanently stored.
Apr 07, 2020 · Patient Allergy Data; Electronic Lab Results; Doctor Visits; Discharge Summaries; Detailed Immunization Record; Types of Patient Portals. There are two types of patient portals mainly integrated patient portal software and standalone patient portals. With many software vendor options, a standalone EHR Software may not offer complete benefits. Usually, …
Electronic personal health records (PHRs) remedy that problem by making your information accessible to you anytime via web-enabled devices, such as computers, smartphones and tablets.
In general, your PHR needs to include anything that helps you and your doctors manage your health — starting with the basics: Your doctor's names and phone numbers. Allergies, including drug allergies. Your medications, including dosages. List and dates of illnesses and surgeries.
But EHRs contain more extensive information because they're used by health care providers to store visit notes, test results and much more. A PHR that is tied to an EHR is called a patient portal. In some but not all cases you can add information, such as home blood pressure readings, to your record via a patient portal.
Perhaps the most common concerns about PHRs are about privacy and security. To address these issues, reputable PHR systems follow industry best practices, such as making their privacy policies public and submitting to monitoring by independent organizations. In addition, federal laws have been put in place to protect the security of personal health information.
You could use an app such as the Health app for iPhones, which includes Medical ID, which makes critical information available via the lock screen for use by first responders in an emergency. Medical ID can display medical conditions, allergies, medications, blood type and emergency contacts. You can also use it to indicate if you're registered to be organ donor.
You can also add information about what you're doing to stay healthy and prevent disease, such as: Home blood pressure readings. Exercise and dietary habits. Health goals, such as stopping smoking or losing weight.
If your primary care doctor offers a patient portal, use it. The staff at the front desk should be able to tell you how to register for it. (If your doctor doesn't offer one, ask if one will be available in the future.) Then start taking advantage of its features. Most portals offer the following:
Is your EHR vendor using Academy materials? Several EHR companies have signed licensing agreements with the Academy, allowing them to incorporate Academy patient education materials into their EHRs. These materials include more than 90 downloadable handouts about common eye-related issues, 3-D animations that illustrate standard procedures and treatment options, and educational videos that detail common ophthalmic conditions. “We integrated this content with our EHR system so when a patient receives their clinical summary, they also receive educational information based on their diagnosis. We can also add information such as supplemental brochures, customize information, or include links that redirect patients to the AAO website or our contact lens distributor for more information,” said Ms. Mullaney. For more information, including a list of participating EHR vendors, go to: http://store.aao.org/ehr-integration-information.html.
Are patient education materials available through your EHR system? “One advantage of our EHR system is the ability to right click and send anything we have in writing through the portal to our patients. Every relevant education piece is not only saved to a patient’s chart but is also sent to the portal. Before our patients leave the office after an appointment, we tell them that we will be sending this information to their portal account. When they get home, they can read it at their leisure and share it with their family or friends. And included on every brochure at our office is a notice that says that the brochure is also available through the patient portal,” said Ms. Mullaney.
And now, with a portal, patients can access these materials online.
Screen registration information for bad data. “Our patients can complete their registration and update their information online, but we review it before it is accepted into our EHR—it is not a live interaction where patients can update the system,” said Ms. Woodke. “We want to make sure that the data is valid before accepting it. If something is not entered or updated correctly in registration, it could hold up our claims or cause other problems that can affect the patient and the practice.”
Patient Portal platform is being embraced by health care institutions as a constructive tool to enhance patient engagement levels. A patient portal provides a secure and encrypted platform for patients to access their health information round the clock via smartphone devices and tablets. With broadband connectivity from almost everywhere, the patient portal facility is being used readily.
The patient portal platform should offer HIPAA compliance to ensure the safety and protection of sensitive patient data that is shared. Apart from tight security to protect from any technology breaches it consists of the following set of tools:
When used effectively, patient portals can empower consumers by enabling active management of their own care. However, we know little about how patient portal use fits into the broader personal health information management (PHIM) practices of various groups, such as older adults.
examined views of family practice physicians and staff about the benefits, barriers, and use of PHRs by older adults, in relation to medication use4. They concluded that the family practice physicians did not have a complete understanding of the benefits that PHRs can offer patients. Several studies highlight the challenges that older adults face when using PHRs, such as physical or cognitive limitations and low computer literacy5. Providers have also raised concern that use of PHRs could introduce privacy risks to patients4. Other providers worry that older adults may be especially vulnerable to “getting scammed”4while using electronic or online PHRs.
Our preliminary anaysis found that most portal users (93%) reported using a computer 6–7 days per week and 47% rated themselves as “very experienced” computer users. All reported having learned to use a computer 10 or more years ago and having Internet access where they live. In contrast, the majority of portal nonusers reported having used computers less than 6 days per week (30%) or not all all (36%), 25% lacked Internet access where they lived, and 19% reported they had not learned to use a computer. Among the 52 particpants (portal users and nonusers) who use computers, the most common use of computers was emailing and browsing the Internet.
Portal users ranged in age from 61 to 93 years , and most lived independently in a private residence (60%) and had college education or higher (67%). Although portal nonusers were similar in age, fewer were college educated (53%) and more lived in retirement or assisted living facilities (74%).
Our SOARING project, a 5-year Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) funded investigation, is designed to address this gap by establishing an understanding of the PHIM practices and needs of older adults. Based on Grounded Theory12and the ecological framework of the Balance Theory13, 14, we sought to identify current health information practices and needs among older adults living in a variety of residential settings. Using focus groups, in-depth interviews with longitudinal follow-up, and particpatory design with older adults and their key stakeholders, our goals are to develop older adult-centered guidelines to assist developers in the design of useful and usable health information management tools that better serve older adults.
We conducted semi-structured, 60–90 minute interviews with each participant. In most instances, interviews took place at a participant’s place of residence. After obtaining consent, we audio recorded the interview, photographed artifacts associated with PHIM, and made field notes. The interview session consisted of a demographic survey followed by a series of semi-structured questions concerning health and the use and organization of personal health information. Topics covered in the interview guide included: health conditions, management of health conditions, interactions with healthcare providers and corresponding materials received, health-related record keeping, health information seeking, and use of patient portals. Examples of specific questions include: Do you keep any records related to your health? What information (if any) do you keep track of to keep yourself healthy? What tools do you use to track your health information?
A patient portal is a type of personal health record (PHR) that is connected to an electronic health record (EHR) system. Patient portals provide a secure website through which patients can access their clinical data. They are a key component of most EHR architectures and an important focus of meaningful use because of their potential to streamline the delivery of patient-centered health care. Features of patient portals may include secure messaging, after-visit summaries, medication lists, allergy lists, laboratory results, and appointment scheduling. When used effectively, patient portals can empower consumers by enabling active management of their own care. However, we know little about how patient portal use fits into the broader personal health information management (PHIM) practices of various groups, such as older adults.
Electronic medical record (EMR) data are becoming common for health care delivery. EMR data are input by providers in the process of providing care. Health care statistics are derived from EMR data warehouses. The data requirements and idiosyncrasies for health statistics differ from those for patient care. EMRs are a boon to researchers, but using data designed for patient care for research purposes is challenging.
Health Information Exchange presents the opportunity to cross-settings to create patient centered data. The group affirmed the importance of having different types of data, including: patient-centered data, provider-centered data, cross-sectional data, and longitudinal data, limited standardized datasets that cover all patients, and more detailed data sets obtained from representative samples. The complementary nature of these data sources was discussed.
Analysis of data from hospitals using and not using EMRs found that item non-response was similar for the different types of hospitals, but many questions remain unanswered about data quality.
NCHS began tracking HIT adoption in ambulatory care settings in 2001. The original goal was to determine when adoption would be so common that our data collection systems would have to respond to it.
Both standalone and tethered PHRs present issues with patient-generated health data. Providers express trust issues with PGHD, stating that potentially inaccurate patient data can inform a detrimental treatment plan.
The ONC’s definition of a tethered PHR is very similar to the definition that the agency provides for patient portals: A patient portal is a secure online website that gives patients convenient 24-hour access to personal health information from anywhere with an Internet connection.
Patient data management is the major distinguishing factor associated with standalone PHRs. The system is entirely patient-controlled, and providers can only view the data when their patients provide them access.
Other studies have also indicated that patient data access via PHR or patient portal can help improve outcomes. Patients who can review and revise clinician notes can see better patient safety outcomes, for example.
A patient portal is a secure online website that gives patients convenient 24-hour access to personal health information from anywhere with an Internet connection. Using a secure username and password, patients can view health information such as: 1 Recent doctor visits 2 Discharge summaries 3 Medications 4 Immunizations 5 Allergies 6 Lab results
While there were multiple factors that may have led to Google Health’s demise, limited provider interaction with the data and few motivational components were arguably most significant.
Health IT developers are working on overcoming these interoperability barriers.Some vendors, such as Epic Systems, have made significant progress integrating patient portal information from multiple providers.
These findings likely point to a disparity between patient portal access and patient digital health literacy. Ninety percent of healthcare organizations offer patient portal access, meaning 90 percent of organizations give patients some mechanism by which they can view their own health information and lab results.
Patients who didn’t use the portal said they had security concerns, prefer red to communicate with their providers in person, or did not believe they had a use for the patient portal. All of this suggests that access to technology and other key infrastructure are not barriers to portal use; patient education about technology is.
The survey of about 1,000 adult patients found that only 57 percent know their own blood type. Only 38 percent know their cholesterol levels, while 33 percent know their blood sugar levels. Racial disparities also emerged when looking at self-knowledge about key biometric data.
However, medical experts across the country have likewise noted that basic knowledge of one’s biometric data is key for making informed healthcare decisions and meaningfully engaging in the healthcare system. Patients’ limited knowledge about their own health information is likely due to their inability to access their own health data.
Patients’ limited knowledge about their own health information is likely due to their inability to access their own health data. Forty percent of respondents said they did not have or did not know if they had access to their own lab results. Twenty percent said they were unable to provide lab results to referring clinicians who asked.
Seventy-one percent of African American patients said they don’t know their cholesterol and 77 percent said they don’t know their blood sugar levels. African Americans represent a high-risk population for heart disease, making it especially troubling that these patients are unaware of key health information.
Instead, patients are opting for less digital and more outdated modes of record keeping. One-third of respondents said they keep their medical records in a filing cabinet in their homes. This finding remains true when controlling for younger patients ages 20 to 37 who most medical experts say are most poised for health IT and patient portal adoption.
In total, we selected 376 quotes and identified 26 barriers and 28 facilitators. The results are presented according to the 6 levels of the Grol and Wensing model [26]. The full list of all barriers and facilitators—including the number of subjects for each stakeholder group—is presented in Multimedia Appendix 3. After the inclusion of 7 hospitals (using purposive sampling), we analyzed the data saturation. The data were found to be saturated, meaning that after analyzing the first 6 hospitals, no new categories emerged from the transcripts of the final hospital. We therefore did not include further hospitals.
This can be affected by multiple factors at the micro (eg, “individuals”), meso (eg, “re sources”), and macro (eg, “sociopolitical context”) levels [21]. Several implementation models are available, such as “The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR),” which is used in many studies as a guiding framework [22-24]. CFIR consists of 5 levels at which barriers and facilitators can occur during implementation: (1) technology-related factors (eg, “adaptability,” “complexity,” and “cost”); (2) outer setting (eg, “policy and incentives”); (3) inner setting (eg, “resources”); (4) process (eg, “engagement of stakeholders”); and (5) individual health professionals (eg, “individual’s knowledge”). In this model, patients are part of the “outer setting,” suggesting that the CFIR framework is aimed primarily at institutions [24]. Another example is the “Fit between Individuals, Tasks, and Technology” (FITT) framework, which is aimed at the adoption of IT [25]. The comprehensive model of Grol and Wensing [26] summarizes the 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. McGinn et al [21] argue that the consideration of various stakeholder opinions can contribute to successful implementations. However, previous research mainly focused on perceptions of single stakeholder groups regarding patient portal implementation, such as physicians [27] or nurses [28]. This highlights the importance of identifying the opinions of many stakeholders during patient portal implementation. Furthermore, it remains unclear which factors are important in accomplishing change in the various groups [26].
All interviews were performed by telephone and lasted for, on average, 20 min. Participants were first asked for their consent to make audio recordings of the interviews. Then, the purpose of the interview was introduced, and subjects were asked if they received the introductory email. This email was then briefly discussed such that the subjects were aware of the topics to be discussed. After that, questions were asked about participants’ characteristics, such as their age and work experience. To make sure an unambiguous definition of a patient portal was used, participants were asked what their definition of a patient portal was, and if necessary, it was complemented with our definition. Then, we asked them about their perceived barriers to and facilitators of patient portal implementation at all 6 levels [26]. If necessary, for example, if the question was unclear, the interviewer provided examples (and these were also sent per email). At the end of the interview, the participants were asked to suggest additional topics or issues, if any, that had not yet been covered. The interviews were in Dutch, and the questions in Multimedia Appendix 1are translations.
Patient-centeredness is an important element of high-quality care: effective communication between patients and their health care professionals , and information access can both contribute considerably to this [1]. According to the Institute of Medicine, “patients should have unfettered access to their own medical information” [2] to support them in taking control of their health (eg, using medical information to make informed health-related decisions) [2]. Information technology (IT) can play an important role in improving access to this information [3], and it also improves the participation of patients in their own care [4]. In health care, an increasingly popular way to facilitate this is by using patient portals [5]. Patient portals can be defined as “applications which are designed to give the patient secure access to health information and allow secure methods for communication and information sharing” [6], as well as for administrative purposes [7], and are mostly provided by a single health care institution [6,8]. These portals are often connected to the electronic health record (EHR) of an institution—defined as tethered patient portals [9]—to provide access to patients’ medical information [3,10-12]. Some institutions allow patient portals to facilitate communication between patients and health care professionals [3,6,12], view their appointments and provide patient education [11,13], share information [12], request for repeat medication prescriptions [3], and provide tailored feedback [11,13]. Patient portals may have a range of functionalities that enable information exchange (such as having access to the EHR), which in turn may facilitate and improve the communication between the patient and the health care professional [11,14]. Previous research showed that patients are especially satisfied with access to information from the EHR and the list of their appointments [11]. Portal use can also have a positive effect on self-management of conditions [15-18], communication between patients and providers, quality of care [16,17] and participation in treatment [17]. Patient empowerment can also be improved; the accessibility of information can especially contribute to “patients’ knowledge” and their “perception of autonomy and being respected” [19]. On the other hand, effects on health outcomes are reported to be mixed [6]. In summary, patient portals can be important as they provide patients with access to their own medical information, enable interaction with their health care professionals [8], and aim to involve patients in their own care processes [1].
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.
Health Current is an active participant in The Patient Centered Data Home™ (PCDH) initiative. PCDH is a cost-effective, scalable method of exchanging patient data among health information exchanges (HIEs). It’s based on triggering episode alerts, which notify providers a care event has occurred outside of the patient’s “home” HIE, and confirms the availability and the specific location of the clinical data, enabling providers to initiate a simple query to access real-time information across state and regional lines and the care continuum. For more information on PCDH click here.
Health Current is an active participant in The Patient Centered Data Home™ (PCDH) initiative. PCDH is a cost-effective, scalable method of exchanging patient data among health information exchanges (HIEs). It’s based on triggering episode alerts, which notify providers a care event has occurred outside of the patient’s “home” HIE, and confirms the availability and the specific location of the clinical data, enabling providers to initiate a simple query to access real-time information across state and regional lines and the care continuum. For more information on PCDH click here.
Clinical information – These records may be Continuity of Care Documents (CCDs) or HL7 v2 messages containing immunizations, medications, problem lists, lab or radiology reports, treatments/procedures, allergies and other clinical documents.