Patient Usage of Apps to Access Online Medical Records.

This cross-sectional study analyzes the use of patient portal apps and third-party apps for managing multiple patient portals between 2019 and 2022.

Progress and Persistent Disparities in Patient Access to Electronic Health Information.

Importance: Patient access to electronic health information (EHI) available via online medical records and through patient portals has been shown to help individuals make informed health decisions, which are associated with better health outcomes. Objective: To assess progress in patient engagement with EHI and to identify racial or ethnic disparities in access to patient portals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a repeated cross-sectional study using data from the US Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS), a nationally representative survey of US adults that tracks individuals' access and use of their health information. Six cycles of HINTS were included (2014, 2017-2020, 2022); data for the disparities analysis came from the 2022 HINTS. Data analyses were performed in April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient reports of (1) being offered portal access by a health care provider (HCP); (2) being encouraged by the HCP to use the portal; (3) accessing their portal; and (4) using the portal for various purposes. Additional key measures included methods used to access portals and self-reported ease of understanding information contained in the online medical records or portals. Results: The total study population included 22 266 individuals (mean [SE] age, 49.9 [0.15] years) of whom 13 348 (54%) were female; 909 (5%) self-identified as Asian, 3523 (12%) as Black, 3178 (14%) as Hispanic, 13 555 (66%) as White, and 785 (3%) as another or more than 1 race. Nationally, patient portal access increased each year from 2014 through 2022, with a 46% increase observed between 2020 (n = 3319) and 2022 (n = 5437). However, in 2022, Black and Hispanic individuals reported being offered access to a portal by their HCP at significantly lower rates compared with White individuals (73% vs 81%; χ21 = 22.24; P < .001; and 62% vs 81%; χ21 = 135.57; P < .001, respectively) as well as accessing a patient portal at lower rates (60% vs 70%; χ21 = 23.80; P < .001; and 57% vs 70%; χ21 = 49.02; P < .001, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this repeated cross-sectional study of US adult respondents to the HINTS suggest that access to and engagement with patient portals increased significantly from 2014 through 2022, but racial and ethnic disparities in patient access persisted in 2022. However, there were no significant differences in use or understanding of information available in the online medical records among those who accessed them, which suggests that efforts to promote equitable opportunities to access EHI would likely be associated with increased patient access.

Hospitals' electronic access to information needed to treat COVID-19.

Objective: To understand whether hospitals had electronic access to information needed to treat COVID-19 patients and identify factors contributing to differences in information availability. Materials and methods: Using 2021 data from the American Hospital Association IT Supplement, we produced national estimates on the electronic availability of information needed to treat COVID-19 at US non-federal acute care hospitals (N = 1976) and assessed differences in information availability by hospital characteristics and engagement in interoperable exchange. Results: In 2021, 38% of hospitals electronically received information needed to effectively treat COVID-19 patients. Information availability was significantly higher among higher-resourced hospitals and those engaged in interoperable exchange (44%) compared to their counterparts. In adjusted analyses, hospitals engaged in interoperable exchange were 140% more likely to receive needed information electronically compared to those not engaged in exchange (relative risk [RR]=2.40, 95% CI, 1.82-3.17, P<.001). System member hospitals (RR = 1.62, 95% CI, 1.36-1.92, P<.001) and major teaching hospitals (RR = 1.35, 95% CI, 1.10-1.64, P=.004) were more likely to have information available; for-profit hospitals (RR = 0.14, 95% CI, 0.08-0.24, P<.001) and hospitals in high social deprivation areas (RR = 0.83, 95% CI, 0.71-0.98, P = .02) were less likely to have information available. Discussion: Despite high rates of hospitals' engagement in interoperable exchange, hospitals' electronic access to information needed to support the care of COVID-19 patients was limited. Conclusion: Limited electronic access to patient information from outside sources may impede hospitals' ability to effectively treat COVID-19 and support patient care during public health emergencies.

Trends in electronic health record capabilities for tracking documentation time.

OBJECTIVES: To understand hospitals' access to and use of data from electronic health record (EHR) developers that quantify the amount of time clinicians spend documenting clinical care in EHRs. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive analysis of 4 waves of a nationally representative survey of US nonfederal acute care hospitals from 2017 to 2019 and 2021 (N = 10,662 across years). METHODS: We identified the share of hospitals that had access to EHR documentation time measures between 2017 and 2021 and how access varied by hospital and EHR characteristics. We then described how EHR data were used among hospitals with access and whether use varied by developer. RESULTS: The share of hospitals with access to EHR documentation time measures increased significantly each year between 2017 and 2021, when more than two-thirds of hospitals reported having access to these measures. Despite hospitals' increased access to measures that track EHR time, lower-resourced hospitals, nonteaching hospitals, and hospitals with non-market-leading EHR developers were less likely to report having access than their counterparts. In 2021, the 2 most common uses of EHR data were "identifying providers in need of training and support" and "identifying areas to improve clinical workflow." The share of hospitals indicating use of EHR data increased between 2019 and 2021 for all studied uses. CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of hospitals with access to EHR documentation time measures used them for more purposes over time, suggesting their increased value. Although hospitals' access to and use of EHR documentation measures increased significantly in the last 5 years, future research efforts should investigate whether the use of these measures translates into reduced burden for providers.

Disparities in patient portal access and the role of providers in encouraging access and use.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify racial and ethnic disparities in patient portal offers, access, and use and to examine the role of providers in facilitating access to electronic health information (EHI) by offering patient portals and encouraging their use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using nationally representative survey data from 2019 and 2020 (N = 8028), we examined disparities in patients being offered access to a portal by their provider and differences in subsequent access and use. Using multivariable models, we estimated the effect of race and ethnicity on the likelihood of being offered, accessing or using a portal. Among those offered, we examined the relationship between provider encouragement and portal access; and for those who did not access their portal, we explored reasons for nonuse. RESULTS: Black and Hispanic individuals were offered and accessed patient portals at significantly lower rates than White individuals. Compared to Whites, Black and Hispanic individuals were 5.2 percentage-points less likely to be offered a portal (P < .05) and, among those offered, 7.9 percentage-points less likely to access their portal (P < .05). Black and Hispanic individuals who were offered and accessed a portal were 12 percentage-points more likely than Whites to use it to download or transmit information (P < .01). Individuals who were offered a portal and encouraged to use it were 21 percentage-points more likely to access it. DISCUSSION: Differences in patient portal access and use are likely driven by disparities in which groups of patients reported being offered a portal. CONCLUSIONS: Providers play an important role in increasing access to EHI by facilitating access to patient portals.

National Estimates and Physician-Reported Impacts of Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Use.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread adoption of state prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), it is unclear how often PDMPs are accessed through an electronic health record system (EHR-PDMP integration), or whether efforts to make PDMPs easier to access and use have improved their utility. OBJECTIVE: To produce national-level estimates on the use of PDMPs among office-based physicians and benefits associated with their use. DESIGN: We use nationally representative survey data to produce descriptive statistics on PDMP use and associated benefits among office-based physicians in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: 1398 office-based physicians who prescribe controlled substances. MAIN MEASURES: We examined physician-reported ease and frequency of PDMP use, and how EHR-PDMP integration affects frequency and ease of use. Multivariate models were used to assess whether characteristics of PDMP use were related to physician-reported benefits such as reduced prescribing of controlled substances and perceived improvements in clinical decision-making. KEY RESULTS: In 2019, two-thirds of office-based physicians in the USA reported frequent use of their state PDMP and over three-quarters reported they were easy to use. Both frequency and ease of use were positively correlated with PDMP integration status. Respondents who frequently checked their state's PDMP were 8.7 percentage points (95% CI -.4 to 17.8) more likely to report perceived benefits and reported 2.2 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.83) more benefits. Respondents who indicated their PDMP was easy to use were 12.7 percentage points (95% CI .040 to .214) more likely to report perceived benefits and reported 0.94 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.61) more benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest efforts to make PDMPs easier to access and use aided physicians in making informed clinical decisions that may not be captured by reduced prescribing alone. Efforts to further increase frequency and ease of use-including advancing a standards-based approach to PDMP and EHR data interoperability-may further increase the benefit of PDMPs.

The Emergency Medicine Physician Workforce: Projections for 2030.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to determine the current and projected supply in 2030 of contributors to emergency care, including emergency residency-trained and board-certified physicians, other physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants. In addition, this study was designed to determine the current and projected demand for residency-trained, board-certified emergency physicians. METHODS: To forecast future workforce supply and demand, sources of existing data were used, assumptions based on past and potential future trends were determined, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine how the final forecast would be subject to variance in the baseline inputs and assumptions. Methods included: (1) estimates of the baseline workforce supply of physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants; (2) estimates of future changes in the raw numbers of persons entering and leaving that workforce; (3) estimates of the productivity of the workforce; and (4) estimates of the demand for emergency care services. The methodology assumes supply equals demand in the base year and estimates the change between the base year and 2030; it then compares supply and demand in 2030 under different scenarios. RESULTS: The task force consensus was that the most likely future scenario is described by: 2% annual graduate medical education growth, 3% annual emergency physician attrition, 20% encounters seen by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant, and 11% increase in emergency department visits relative to 2018. This scenario would result in a surplus of 7,845 emergency physicians in 2030. CONCLUSION: The specialty of emergency medicine is facing the likely oversupply of emergency physicians in 2030. The factors leading to this include the increasing supply of and changing demand for emergency physicians. An organized, collective approach to a balanced workforce by the specialty of emergency medicine is imperative.

Estimation and Comparison of Current and Future Racial/Ethnic Representation in the US Health Care Workforce.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic coupled with health disparities have highlighted the disproportionate burden of disease among Black, Hispanic, and Native American (ie, American Indian or Alaska Native) populations. Increasing transparency around the representation of these populations in health care professions may encourage efforts to increase diversity that could improve cultural competence among health care professionals and reduce health disparities. Objective: To estimate the racial/ethnic diversity of the current health care workforce and the graduate pipeline for 10 health care professions and to evaluate whether the diversity of the pipeline suggests greater representation of Black, Hispanic, and Native American populations in the future. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used weighted data from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) to compare the diversity of 10 health care occupations (advanced practice registered nurses, dentists, occupational therapists, pharmacists, physical therapists, physician assistants, physicians, registered nurses, respiratory therapists, and speech-language pathologists) with the diversity of the US working-age population, and 2019 data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) were used to compare the diversity of graduates with that of the US population of graduation age. Data from the IPEDS included all awards and degrees conferred between July 1, 2018, and June 30, 2019, in the US. Main Outcomes and Measures: A health workforce diversity index (diversity index) was developed to compare the racial/ethnic diversity of the 10 health care professions (or the graduates in the pipeline) analyzed with the racial/ethnic diversity of the current working-age population (or average student-age population). For the current workforce, the index was the ratio of current workers in a health occupation to the total working-age population by racial/ethnic group. For new graduates, the index was the ratio of recent graduates to the population aged 20 to 35 years by racial/ethnic group. A value equal to 1 indicated equal representation of the racial/ethnic groups in the current workforce (or pipeline) compared with the working-age population. Results: The study sample obtained from the 2019 ACS comprised a weighted total count of 148 358 252 individuals aged 20 to 65 years (White individuals: 89 756 689; Black individuals: 17 916 227; Hispanic individuals: 26 953 648; and Native American individuals: 1 108 404) who were working or searching for work and a weighted total count of 71 608 009 individuals aged 20 to 35 years (White individuals: 38 995 242; Black individuals: 9 830 765; Hispanic individuals: 15 257 274; and Native American individuals: 650 221) in the educational pipeline. Among the 10 professions assessed, the mean diversity index for Black people was 0.54 in the current workforce and in the educational pipeline. In 5 of 10 health care professions, representation of Black graduates was lower than representation in the current workforce (eg, occupational therapy: 0.31 vs 0.50). The mean diversity index for Hispanic people was 0.34 in the current workforce; it improved to 0.48 in the educational pipeline but remained lower than 0.50 in 6 of 10 professions, including physical therapy (0.33). The mean diversity index for Native American people was 0.54 in the current workforce and increased to 0.57 in the educational pipeline. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that Black, Hispanic, and Native American people were underrepresented in the 10 health care professions analyzed. Although some professions had greater diversity than others and there appeared to be improvement among graduates in the educational pipeline compared with the current workforce, additional policies are needed to further strengthen and support a workforce that is more representative of the population.