Inpatient-outpatient shared electronic health records: telemedicine and laboratory follow-up after hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVES: Continuity of patient information across settings can improve transitions after hospital discharge, but outpatient clinicians often have limited access to complete information from recent hospitalizations. We examined whether providers' timely access to clinical information through shared inpatient-outpatient electronic health records (EHRs) was associated with follow-up visits, return emergency department (ED) visits, or readmissions after hospital discharge in patients with diabetes. STUDY DESIGN: Stepped-wedge observational study. METHODS: As an integrated delivery system staggered implementation of a shared inpatient-outpatient EHR, we studied 241,510 hospital discharges in patients with diabetes (2005-2011), examining rates of outpatient follow-up office visits, telemedicine (phone visits and asynchronous secure messages), laboratory tests, and return ED visits or readmissions (as adverse events). We used multivariate logistic regression adjusting for time trends, patient characteristics, and medical center and accounting for patient clustering to calculate adjusted follow-up rates. RESULTS: For patients with diabetes, provider use of a shared inpatient-outpatient EHR was associated with a statistically significant shift toward follow-up delivered through a combination of telemedicine and outpatient laboratory tests, without a traditional in-person visit (from 22.9% with an outpatient-only EHR to 27.0% with a shared inpatient-outpatient EHR; P < .05). We found no statistically significant differences in 30-day return ED visits (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.09) or readmissions (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.06) with the shared EHR compared with the outpatient-only EHR. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time clinical information availability during transitions between health care settings, along with robust telemedicine access, may shift the method of care delivery without adversely affecting patient health outcomes. Efforts to expand interoperability and information exchange may support follow-up care efficiency.

Portal Use Among Patients With Chronic Conditions: Patient-reported Care Experiences.

BACKGROUND: Personal health records offer patients access to view their own health information and to manage their care online through secure patient portal tools. Little is known about the patient-reported experience in using health portals to manage chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: In a patient-centered research study, we examined how using portal tools affects patient health care experiences among patients with chronic conditions. We also examined barriers among nonportal users. RESEARCH DESIGN: A cross-sectional patient survey. SUBJECTS: Patients with a chronic condition in an integrated delivery system offering a patient portal. MEASURES: Respondents reported barriers, preferences, and experiences in using the patient portal, and whether using the portal changed their overall health. RESULTS: Among all the 1824 respondents (70% response rate), portal nonusers reported preferring in-person health care (54%) or experiencing internet access barriers (41%). Portal users reported that using the portal was convenient (90%), the information available was useful (92%), and that it integrated well with other health care (92%). Among users, 31% reported that using the portal had improved their overall health. After adjustment, patients were significantly more likely to report that portal use improved their health if they had also reported convenience, information usefulness, or integration with other care (P<0.05). Reassuringly, patient-reported impacts on overall health did not vary by patient characteristics (including age, race, sex, education, income, complex conditions). CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic conditions using the portal reported convenience, information usefulness, and integration of the patient portal with their health care; these may act as potential pathways improving health.

Patients with complex chronic conditions: Health care use and clinical events associated with access to a patient portal.

BACKGROUND: For patients with diabetes, many with multiple complex chronic conditions, using a patient portal can support self-management and coordination of health care services, and may impact the frequency of in-person health care visits. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of portal access on the number of outpatient visits, emergency visits, and preventable hospitalizations. DESIGN: Observational study comparing patients' visit rates with and without portal access, using marginal structural modeling with inverse probability weighting estimates to account for potential bias due to confounding and attrition. SETTING: Large integrated delivery system which implemented a patient portal (2006-2007). PATIENTS: We examined 165,447 patients with diabetes defined using clinical registries. Our study included both patients with diabetes-only and patients with multiple complex chronic conditions (diabetes plus asthma, congestive artery disease, congestive heart failure, or hypertension). MEASUREMENTS: We examined rates of outpatient office visits, emergency room visits, and preventable hospitalizations (for ambulatory care sensitive conditions). RESULTS: Access to a patient portal was associated with significantly higher rates of outpatient office visits, in both patients with diabetes only and in patients with multiple complex conditions (p<0.05). In patients with multiple complex chronic conditions, portal use was also associated with significantly fewer emergency room visits (3.9 fewer per 1,000 patients per month, p<0.05) and preventable hospital stays (0.8 fewer per 1,000 patients per month, p<0.05). In patients with only diabetes, the results were directionally consistent but not statistically significantly associated with emergency room visits and preventable hospital stays. LIMITATIONS: Observational study in an integrated delivery system. CONCLUSION: Access to a patient portal can increase engagement in outpatient visits, potentially addressing unmet clinical needs, and reduce downstream health events that lead to emergency and hospital care, particularly among patients with multiple complex conditions.

Bridging the digital divide: mobile access to personal health records among patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: Some patients lack regular computer access and experience a digital divide that causes them to miss internet-based health innovations. The diffusion of smartphones has increased internet access across the socioeconomic spectrum, and increasing the channels through which patients can access their personal health records (PHRs) could help bridge the divide in PHR use. We examined PHR use through a computer-based Web browser or mobile device. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional historical cohort analysis. METHODS: Among adult patients in the diabetes registry of an integrated healthcare delivery system, we studied the devices used to access their PHR during 2016. RESULTS: Among 267,208 patients with diabetes, 68.1% used the PHR in 2016; 60.6% of all log-ins were via computer and 39.4% were via mobile device. Overall, 63.9% used it from both a computer and mobile device, 29.6% used only a computer, and 6.5% used only a mobile device. After adjustment, patients who were black, Hispanic, or Asian; lived in lower socioeconomic status (SES) neighborhoods; or had lower engagement were all significantly more likely to use the PHR only from a mobile device (P <.05). Patients using the PHR only via mobile device used it less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile-ready PHRs may increase access among patients facing a digital divide in computer use, disproportionately reaching racial/ethnic minorities and lower SES patients. Nonetheless, even with a mobile-optimized and app-accessible PHR, differences in PHR use by race/ethnicity and SES remain. Continued efforts are needed to increase equitable access to PHRs among patients with chronic conditions.

Implementation of an outpatient electronic health record and emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and office visits among patients with diabetes.

IMPORTANCE: The US federal government is spending billions of dollars in physician incentives to encourage the meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs). Although the use of EHRs has potential to improve patient health outcomes, the existing evidence has been limited and inconsistent. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between implementing a commercially available outpatient EHR and emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and office visits for patients with diabetes mellitus. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION: Staggered EHR implementation across outpatient clinics in an integrated delivery system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California) between 2005 and 2008 created an opportunity for studying changes associated with EHR use. Among a population-based sample of 169,711 patients with diabetes between 2004 and 2009, we analyzed 4,997,585 person-months before EHR implementation and 4,648,572 person-months after an EHR was being used by patients' physicians. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We examined the association between EHR use and unfavorable clinical events (ED visits and hospitalizations) and office visit use among patients with diabetes, using multivariable regression with patient-level fixed-effect analyses and adjustment for trends over time. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses, use of the EHR was associated with a statistically significantly decreased number of ED visits, 28.80 fewer visits per 1000 patients annually (95% CI, 20.28 to 37.32), from a mean of 519.12 visits per 1000 patients annually without using the EHR to 490.32 per 1000 patients when using the EHR. The EHR was also associated with 13.10 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 patients annually (95% CI, 7.37 to 18.82), from a mean of 251.60 hospitalizations per 1000 patients annually with no EHR to 238.50 per 1000 patients annually when using the EHR. There were similar statistically significant reductions in nonelective hospitalizations (10.92 fewer per 1000 patients annually) and hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (7.08 fewer per 1000 patients annually). There was no statistically significant association between EHR use and office visit rates. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with diabetes, use of an outpatient EHR in an integrated delivery system was associated with modest reductions in ED visits and hospitalizations but not office visit rates. Further studies are needed to quantify the association of EHR use with changes in costs.

Perspectives from deductible plan enrollees: plan knowledge and anticipated care-seeking changes.

BACKGROUND: Consumer directed health care proposes that patients will engage as informed consumers of health care services by sharing in more of their medical costs, often through deductibles. We examined knowledge of deductible plan details among new enrollees, as well as anticipated care-seeking changes in response to the deductible. METHODS: In a large integrated delivery system with a range of deductible-based health plans which varied in services included or exempted from deductible, we conducted a mixed-method, cross-sectional telephone interview study. RESULTS: Among 458 adults newly enrolled in a deductible plan (71% response rate), 51% knew they had a deductible, 26% knew the deductible amount, and 6% knew which medical services were included or exempted from their deductible. After adjusting for respondent characteristics, those with more deductible-applicable services and those with lower self-reported health status were significantly more likely to know they had a deductible. Among those who knew of their deductible, half anticipated that it would cause them to delay or avoid medical care, including avoiding doctor's office visits and medical tests, even services that they believed were medically necessary. Many expressed concern about their costs, anticipating the inability to afford care and expressing the desire to change plans. CONCLUSION: Early in their experience with a deductible, patients had limited awareness of the deductible and little knowledge of the details. Many who knew of the deductible reported that it would cause them to delay or avoid seeking care and were concerned about their healthcare costs.

Evolving health information technology and the timely availability of visit diagnoses from ambulatory visits: a natural experiment in an integrated delivery system.

BACKGROUND: Health information technology (HIT) may improve health care quality and outcomes, in part by making information available in a timelier manner. However, there are few studies documenting the changes in timely availability of data with the use of a sophisticated electronic medical record (EMR), nor a description of how the timely availability of data might differ with different types of EMRs. We hypothesized that timely availability of data would improve with use of increasingly sophisticated forms of HIT. METHODS: We used an historical observation design (2004-2006) using electronic data from office visits in an integrated delivery system with three types of HIT: Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced. We calculated the monthly percentage of visits using the various types of HIT for entry of visit diagnoses into the delivery system's electronic database, and the time between the visit and the availability of the visit diagnoses in the database. RESULTS: In January 2004, when only Basic HIT was available, 10% of office visits had diagnoses entered on the same day as the visit and 90% within a week; 85% of office visits used paper forms for recording visit diagnoses, 16% used Basic at that time. By December 2006, 95% of all office visits had diagnoses available on the same day as the visit, when 98% of office visits used some form of HIT for entry of visit diagnoses (Advanced HIT for 67% of visits). CONCLUSION: Use of HIT systems is associated with dramatic increases in the timely availability of diagnostic information, though the effects may vary by sophistication of HIT system. Timely clinical data are critical for real-time population surveillance, and valuable for routine clinical care.

Clubfoot: etiology and treatment Ignacio V. Ponseti, MD, 1914-.

This biographical sketch of Ignacio V. Ponseti, MD, corresponds to the historic text, The Classic: Congenital Club Foot: The Results of Treatment, available at DOI 10.1007/s11999-009-0720-2 and The Classic: Observations on Pathogenesis and Treatment of Congenital Clubfoot, available at DOI 10.1007/s11999-009-0721-1.

Cost-sharing for emergency care and unfavorable clinical events: findings from the safety and financial ramifications of ED copayments study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of emergency department (ED) copayment levels on ED use and unfavorable clinical events. Data Source/Study Setting. Kaiser Permanente-Northern California (KPNC), a prepaid integrated delivery system. STUDY DESIGN: In a quasi-experimental longitudinal study with concurrent controls, we estimated rates of ED visits, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths associated with higher ED copayments relative to no copayment, using Poisson random effects and proportional hazard models, controlling for patient characteristics. The study period began in January 1999; more than half of the population experienced an employer-chosen increase in their ED copayment in January 2000. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Using KPNC automated databases, the 2000 U.S. Census, and California state death certificates, we collected data on ED visits and unfavorable clinical events over a 36-month period (January 1999 through December 2001) among 2,257,445 commercially insured and 261,091 Medicare insured health system members. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among commercially insured subjects, ED visits decreased 12 percent with the $20-35 copayment (95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 11-13 percent), and 23 percent with the $50-100 copayment (95 percent CI: 23-24 percent) compared with no copayment. Hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths did not increase with copayments. Hospitalizations decreased 4 percent (95 percent CI: 2-6 percent) and 10 percent (95 percent CI: 7-13 percent) with ED copayments of $20-35 and $50-100, respectively, compared with no copayment. Among Medicare subjects, ED visits decreased by 4 percent (95 percent CI: 3-6 percent) with the $20-50 copayments compared with no copayment; unfavorable clinical events did not increase with copayments, e.g., hospitalizations were unchanged (95 percent CI: -3 percent to +2 percent) with $20-50 ED copayments compared with no copayment. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively modest levels of patient cost-sharing for ED care decreased ED visit rates without increasing the rate of unfavorable clinical events.