using a patient portal to communicate laboratory test results in community practices 2012

What do patient portal users think about patient portals?

Patient portals can enhance patient-provider communication and enable patients to check test results, refill prescriptions, review their medical record, and view education materials. In addition, patient portals can simplify administrative tasks such as streamlining registration, scheduling appointments, and providing patient reminders.

How are lab results reviewed in a primary care setting?

Nov 05, 2015 · Facilitators of portal use . The majority of patient portal users made positive comments about the specific portal they used. Easy access to health information, more direct communication with providers, and the ability to make appointments online …

Do patients want to see their lab results online?

comes for patients. The scope included laboratory, cardi-ology, radiology, and other diagnostic tests in inpatient, emergency, and ambulatory settings. The Consensus Group developed Safe Practice Recommendations to promote successful communication of results, and a “starter set” of test results sufficiently abnormal to be

How are test results reviewed and communicated?

percent of U.S. medical centers have reported using centralized call centers to communicate laboratory test critical results. 1. o. Studies have contrasted timeliness of call centers’ critical test result reporting with manual (typically, laboratory personnel) notification systems. Results from the Systematic Reviews

How do patient portals empower consumers?

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.

How old are Portal users?

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%).

Why is it important to understand consumer health information?

Important to the success of the consumer health movement is accurate, accessible, and understandable health information to assist with treatment and health decisions . Older adults are the largest consumers of health care and expend the greatest proportion of US health care dollars.

What does acknowledgement mean in medical terminology?

Acknowledgement implies that the sender (clinicianreporting the results of a diagnostic test value/interpre-tation) has received confirmation from the recipient(responsible provider or their covering provider) thathe/she has received the results of a diagnostic test andhas accepted the responsibility for follow-up. The senderis responsible for documenting details of the handoffprocess (i.e. name and role of the person receiving theinformation, date and time, type of test and testvalue/interpretation and his/her name and role).

What is the Massachusetts Patient Safety Initiative?

Massachusetts hospitals have collaborated in astatewide patient safety initiative aimed atimproving our ability to communicate criticaltest results in a timely and reliable way to the clinicianwho can take action. This topic was selected in March2002 by an advisory group of hospital representativesconvened by the Massachusetts Coalition for thePrevention of Medical Errors (the Coalition) and theMassachusetts Hospital Association (MHA). There wasbroad consensus that errors in the process of communi-cation of test results were both frequent and had thepotential for serious harm. Solutions to this problemwould address enhancing communication, teamwork,and information transfer, all fundamental system factorslinked to patient safety.

Who is a licensed independent provider?

Any licensed independent provider who would be respon-sible for ordering and/or acting on the results of diagnos-tic testing in either the inpatient or ambulatory setting.Providers are those individuals who have clinical privi-leges and are required to be credentialed within a hospital, HMO, or private practice. These individuals aretypically MDs, DOs, nurse practitioners, and physician’s assistants.

How many studies met the review inclusion criteria?

total of nine studies met the review inclusion criteria. The estimated effects for both automated notification systems and call centers consistently and substantially favor the tested practice. All studies reported positive and statistically significant effects with the exception of one low-powered automated notification study.

What is automated notification system?

Automated notification systems are automated alerting systems or computerized remindersusing mobile phones, pagers, email or other personal electronic devices to alert the responsiblehealthcare provider(s) about laboratory test critical results . Upon receipt of an automatednotification, the responsible provider acknowledges the critical test result and confirms thereceipt of the alert. If the alert is not acknowledged within a specified timeframe, these systemstypically revert to a manual notification system of the responsible and alternate providers.Studies have contrasted the timeliness of automated notification systems’ critical test result reporting with manual (typically, laboratory personnel) notification systems.

What is the description of multiple processes used to manage test results across seven adult hospitals and a children's hospital?

The description of multiple processes used to manage test results across seven adult hospitals and a children’s hospital will provide rich and unique comparative evidence about hospitals of different size, geographical location (rural, regional and metropolitan) and specialty.

What is the purpose of the failure to follow up pathology and medical imaging test results?

Introduction The failure to follow-up pathology and medical imaging test results poses patient-safety risks which threaten the effectiveness, quality and safety of patient care . The objective of this project is to: (1) improve the effectiveness and safety of test-result management through the establishment of clear governance processes of communication, responsibility and accountability; (2) harness health information technology (IT) to inform and monitor test-result management; (3) enhance the contribution of consumers to the establishment of safe and effective test-result management systems.

What is the purpose of study 1?

Study 1 adopts qualitative research approaches including semistructured interviews, focus groups and ethnographic observations to gain a better understanding of test-result communication and management practices in hospitals, and to identify patient-safety risks which require quality-improvement interventions .

What are the results of a sodium, potassium, lactate, creatinine, magnesium study?

The study will concentrate on a set of laboratory results (eg, sodium, potassium, lactate, creatinine, magnesium) where the results are either: (1) critical and signify a pathophysiological state that is potentially life threatening, or (2) may result in significant patient morbidity, irreversible harm or mortality.

What is the aim of the study?

Aim 1: to improve the effectiveness and safety of test-result management through the establishment of clear processes of communication, responsibility and accountability (study 1); Aim 2: to harness health IT to inform and monitor test-result management (study 2);

How does pathology help in clinical care?

Pathology and medical imaging services perform a major role in the delivery of patient care by ensuring reliable and accurate results are delivered in a timely fashion to inform clinical management decisions. 1 One of the main sources of problems is errors in the reporting phase of the laboratory process, when test-result information is communicated to the requesting (or referring) clinician. Such errors are often due to a lack of agreed standards or guidelines among laboratories, medical imaging departments, hospitals and other healthcare settings about what are critical, unexpected or significantly abnormal results, and when and how these results should be communicated to the responsible clinician. 12 13 Definitions of thresholds for critical tests and subsequent notification processes for critical pathology and imaging test results are largely based on consensus and expert opinions, and lack a rigorous evidence base. 12 Good practice recommendations in this area emphasise the importance of clear definitions of key terms, the need for agreed alert thresholds and time frames, and specified procedures for fail-safe communication of test results that pose a critical or significant risk to patient safety. 8 12 13 This lack of standards is currently under review by a collaboration between the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA) and the Australian Association of Clinical Biochemists (AACB) which has established the Pathology Information, Terminology and Units Standardisation programme. 14 This new initiative aims to draw on existing evidence from pathology datasets to establish standardised pathology information structures and terminologies to improve recording, decision support and communication of laboratory information.

Who are the contributors to the NHMRC grant?

Contributors AG, JIW, ARH, DG, LL and RL initiated the project and led the development of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grant proposal. AG, JIW, DG, ARH, DW, LL and KH are chief investigators on the project and all made contributions to the grant proposal and protocol in their specific areas of expertise. PB, AB, RH, GJ, ML, MM and DM are associate investigators on the NHMRC grant and provided input to the grant proposal and protocol, particularly in the areas of consumer engagement (AB) and standards for pathology reporting (GJ and ML). RL and RH are funding partners on the NHMRC partnership proposal and have made contributions in their areas of expertise, especially the use of health information system in pathology and patient safety policy related to test result management. DB, CC, MRD, R-AH, JL, EM, GS, JT and NW are members of the project team and contributed to the protocol in relation to data collection, interpretation of qualitative data and quantitative data linkage procedures. MRD prepared the first draft of this manuscript based on the grant proposal. All authors have reviewed and provided input.