use of an electronic patient portal among the chronically ill: an observational study. jo

by Allison Lind 8 min read

Use of an electronic patient portal among the chronically …

31 hours ago Abstract. Background: Electronic patient portals may enhance effective interaction between the patient and the health care provider. To grasp the full potential of patient portals, health care providers need more knowledge on which patient groups prefer electronic services and how patients should be served through this channel. Objective: The ... >> Go To The Portal


Do electronic patient portals promote patient engagement with healthcare?

Abstract. Background: Electronic patient portals may enhance effective interaction between the patient and the health care provider. To grasp the full potential of patient portals, health care providers need more knowledge on which patient groups prefer electronic services and how patients should be served through this channel. Objective: The ...

How effective is electronic patient portal adoption among low-income patients?

Dec 08, 2014 · In this study, the predictors of the use of an electronic patient portal were assessed among a group of patients likely to benefit from such a portal, namely the chronically ill. Previous care received by the patient, rather than state of health, age, gender, and patient activation, was an important factor predicting the attractiveness of ...

Where can I find the Weill Cornell electronic patient portal?

Aug 12, 2014 · Background: Electronic patient portals may enhance effective interaction between the patient and the health care provider. To grasp the full potential of patient portals, health care providers need more knowledge on which patient groups prefer electronic services and how patients should be served through this channel. Objective: The objective of this study was to …

What is a patient portal?

Background: Patient 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. Objective: The 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)? Methods: The 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. Results: Searches will be conducted in September 2019, and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2020. Conclusions: This 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 registration: International 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.

What is an EPHR?

BACKGROUND Electronic Personal Health Records (ePHRs) are secure web-based tools that enable individuals to access, manage, and share their medical records. England recently introduced a nationwide ePHR called Patient Online. As with ePHRs in other countries, adoption rates of Patient Online remain low. Understanding factors affecting patients’ use of ePHRs is important to increase adoption rates and improve the implementation success of ePHRs. OBJECTIVE This study aims to examine factors associated with patients’ use of ePHRs in England. METHODS The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) was adapted to the use of ePHRs. To empirically examine the adapted model, a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample was carried out in four general practices in West Yorkshire, England. Factors associated with use of ePHRs were explored using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). RESULTS Of 800 eligible patients invited to take part in the survey, 624 (78%) participants returned a valid questionnaire. Behavioural intention was significantly influenced by performance expectancy (β=0.57, P<0.001), effort expectancy (β=0.16, P<0.001), and perceived privacy and security (β=0.24, P<0.001). The path from social influence to behavioural intention was not significant (β=0.03, P=0.183). Facilitating conditions and behavioural intention significantly influenced use behaviour (β=0.25, P<0.001; β=0.53, P<0.001, respectively). Performance expectancy significantly mediated the effect of effort expectancy and perceived privacy and security on behavioural intention (β=0.19, P<0.001; β=0.28, P=0.001, respectively). Age significantly moderated three paths; PEBI, EEBI, and FCUB. Sex significantly moderated only the relationship between performance expectancy and behavioural intention. Two paths were significantly moderated by education and internet access: EEBI and FCUB. Income moderated the relationship between facilitating conditions and use behaviour. The adapted model accounted for 51% of the variance in performance expectancy, 76% of the variance in behavioural intention, and 48% of the variance in use behaviour. CONCLUSIONS This study identified the main factors that affect patients’ use of ePHRs in England, which should be taken into account for the successful implementation of these systems. For example, developers of ePHRs should involve patients in the process of designing the system to consider functions and features that fit patients’ preferences and skills, thereby, create a useful and easy to use system. The proposed model accounted for 48% of the variance in use behaviour, indicating the existence of other, as yet unidentified, factors that influence adoption of ePHRs. Future studies should confirm the effect of the factors included in the current model and to identify additional factors.