Biomedical subjects

Stephen E Ross

Publications and source records attributed to Stephen E Ross.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

An Internet-based patient-provider communication system: randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Internet-based interactive websites for patient communication (patient portals) may improve communication between patients and their clinics and physicians. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the impact of a patient portal on patients' satisfaction with access to their clinic and clinical care. Another aim was to analyze the content and volume of email messages and telephone calls from patients to their clinic. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial with 606 patients from an academic internal medicine practice. The intervention "portal" group used a patient portal to send secure messages directly to their physicians and to request appointments, prescription refills, and referrals. The control group received usual care. We assessed patient satisfaction at the end of the 6-month trial period and compared the content of telephone and portal communications. RESULTS: Portal group patients reported improved communication with the clinic (portal: 77/174 [44%] "a little better" or "a lot better;" control: 18/146 [12%]; chi2 = 38.8, df = 1, P < .001) and higher satisfaction with overall care (portal: 103/174 [59%] "very good" or "excellent;" control: 78/162 [48%]; chi2 = 4.1, df = 1, P = .04). Portal group patients also reported higher satisfaction with each of the portal's services. Physicians received 1 portal message per day for every 250 portal patients. Total telephone call volume was not affected. Patients were more likely to send informational and psychosocial messages by portal than by phone. Of all surveyed patients, 162/341 (48%) were willing to pay for online correspondence with their physician. Of those willing to pay, the median amount cited was 2 USD per message. CONCLUSIONS: Portal group patients demonstrated increased satisfaction with communication and overall care. Patients in the portal group particularly valued the portal's convenience, reduced communication barriers, and direct physician responses. More online messages from patients contained informational and psychosocial content compared to telephone calls, which may enhance the patient-physician relationship.

Colorado↗

PubMed2005

Expectations of patients and physicians regarding patient-accessible medical records.

BACKGROUND: Middle class populations have supported shared medical records, including Internet-accessible medical records. The attitudes of lower income populations, and of physicians, are less clear. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the attitudes toward shared outpatient medical records among (1) socioeconomically disadvantaged patients in community health centers, (2) insured patients in primary care offices, and (3) a broad range of physicians in outpatient practice. METHODS: Written questionnaires were provided to patients in the waiting rooms of six primary care practices in the metropolitan Denver, Colorado area. Three practices were community health centers, and three practices were primary care clinics of an academic medical center. Questionnaires were also mailed to primary care physicians in the state of Colorado. RESULTS: There was a 79% response rate for patient surveys (601 surveys returned) and a 53% response rate for physician surveys (564 surveys returned). Academic medical center patients and community health center patients were equally likely to endorse shared medical records (94% vs 96%) and Internet-accessible records (54% vs 57%). Community health center patients were more likely than academic medical center patients to anticipate the benefits of shared medical records (mean number of expected benefits = 7.9 vs 7.1, P < .001), and they were also somewhat more likely to anticipate problems with shared records. Significant predictors of patient endorsement of Internet-accessible records were previous use of the Internet (OR = 2.45, CI 1.59-3.79), the number of expected benefits (OR = 1.12 per unit, CI 1.03-1.21), anticipation of asking more questions between visits (OR = 1.73, CI 1.18-2.54), and anticipation of finding the doctors' notes to be confusing (OR = 1.50, CI 1.01-2.22). Physicians were significantly more likely than patients to anticipate that access to records would cause problems. Physicians were significantly less likely than patients to anticipate benefits (mean number of expected benefits = 4.2 vs 7.5, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Interest in shared medical records is not confined to a white, middle class population. Shared medical records are almost universally endorsed across a broad range of ethnic and socioeconomic groups. A majority of patients are also interested in Internet-accessible records, but a substantial minority is not. The primary determinants of support of Internet-accessible records are not age, race, or education level; rather, they are previous experience with the Internet and patients' expectations of the benefits and drawbacks of reading their medical records. Physicians have more concerns about shared medical records and see less potential for benefit. The attitudes of patients and physicians may need to be reconciled for widespread adoption of shared medial records to be achieved.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Use of a patient-accessible electronic medical record in a practice for congestive heart failure: patient and physician experiences.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the experiences of patients and physicians in a clinical trial of an online electronic medical record (SPPARO, System Providing Patients Access to Records Online). DESIGN: Quantitative data were obtained from questionnaires. Qualitative data were obtained from individual interviews and focus groups. MEASUREMENTS: Questionnaire items were based on issues identified by patients and physicians in previous studies. Individual interviews and focus groups were performed using a semistructured format developed through an iterative process. RESULTS: Of the eight physicians who participated in the trial, seven completed questionnaires and interviews. Of the 394 patients in the practice, 107 enrolled in the study, and 54 were assigned randomly to the intervention group. Of these, 41 used SPPARO during the trial period. In questionnaires and interviews, patients were significantly more likely than physicians to anticipate benefits of SPPARO and less likely to anticipate problems. Attitudes of subjects did not diverge from controls after the intervention period. In posttrial focus groups, SPPARO users described its practical benefits. Comprehending medical jargon was a minor obstacle. Physicians anticipated that implementing SPPARO might increase their workload and distort their clinical interactions. In posttrial interviews, physicians and staff reported no change in their workload and no adverse consequences. All of the physicians ultimately supported the concept of giving patients online access to their clinical notes and test results. CONCLUSION: SPPARO was useful for a number of patients. Physicians initially voiced a number of concerns about implementing SPPARO, but their experience with it was far more positive.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2004

Providing a web-based online medical record with electronic communication capabilities to patients with congestive heart failure: randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: It is possible to provide patients with secure access to their medical records using the Internet. Such access may assist patients in the self-management of chronic diseases such as heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To assess how a patient-accessible online medical record affects patient care and clinic operations. The SPPARO (System Providing Access to Records Online) software consisted of a web-based electronic medical record, an educational guide, and a messaging system enabling electronic communication between the patient and staff. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a specialty practice for patients with heart failure. Surveys assessing doctor-patient communication, adherence, and health status were conducted at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year. Use of the system, message volume, utilization of clinical services, and mortality were monitored. RESULTS: One hundred and seven patients were enrolled (54 intervention and 53 controls). At 12 months, the intervention group was not found to be superior in self-efficacy (KCCQ self-efficacy score 91 vs. 85, p=0.08), but was superior in general adherence (MOS compliance score 85 vs. 78, p=0.01). A trend was observed for better satisfaction with doctor-patient communication. The intervention group had more emergency department visits (20 vs. 8, p=0.03), but these visits were not temporally related to use of the online medical record. There were no adverse effects from use of the system. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients with congestive heart failure access to an online medical record was feasible and improved adherence. An effect on health status could not be demonstrated in this pilot study.

Delivery of Health Care↗

PubMedDate not supplied

The effects of promoting patient access to medical records: a review.

The Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act (HIPPA) stipulates that patients must be permitted to review and amend their medical records. As information technology makes medical records more accessible to patients, it may become more commonplace for patients to review their records routinely. This article analyzes the potential benefits and drawbacks of facilitating patient access to the medical record by reviewing previously published research. Previous research includes analysis of clinical notes, surveys of patients and practitioners, and studies of patient-accessible medical records. Overall, studies suggest the potential for modest benefits (for instance, in enhancing doctor-patient communication). Risks (for instance, increasing patient worry or confusion) appear to be minimal in medical patients. The studies, however, were of limited quality and low statistical power to detect the variety of outcomes that may result from implementation of a patient-accessible medical record. The data from these studies lay the foundation for future research.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗