Improving health care proxy documentation using a web-based interview through a patient portal.

OBJECTIVE: Health care proxy (HCP) documentation is suboptimal. To improve rates of proxy selection and documentation, we sought to develop and evaluate a web-based interview to guide patients in their selection, and to capture their choices in their electronic health record (EHR). METHODS: We developed and implemented a HCP interview within the patient portal of a large academic health system. We analyzed the experience, together with demographic and clinical factors, of the first 200 patients who used the portal to complete the interview. We invited users to comment about their experience and analyzed their comments using established qualitative methods. RESULTS: From January 20, 2015 to March 13, 2015, 139 of the 200 patients who completed the interview submitted their HCP information for their clinician to review in the EHR. These patients had a median age of 57 years (Inter Quartile Range (IQR) 45-67) and most were healthy. The 99 patients who did not previously have HCP information in their EHR were more likely to complete and then submit their information than the 101 patients who previously had a proxy in their health record (odds ratio 2.4, P = .005). Qualitative analysis identified several ways in which the portal-based interview reminded, encouraged, and facilitated patients to complete their HCP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients found our online interview convenient and helpful in facilitating selection and documentation of an HCP. Our study demonstrates that a web-based interview to collect and share a patient's HCP information is both feasible and useful.

Evaluation of computer-based medical histories taken by patients at home.

The authors developed a computer-based general medical history to be taken by patients in their homes over the internet before their first visit with their primary care doctor, and asked six doctors and their participating patients to assess this history and its effect on their subsequent visit. Forty patients began the history; 32 completed the history and post-history assessment questionnaire and were for the most part positive in their assessment; and 23 continued on to complete their post-visit assessment questionnaire and were for the most part positive about the helpfulness of the history and its summary at the time of their visit with the doctor. The doctors in turn strongly favored the immediate, routine use of two modules of the history--the family and social histories--for all their new patients. The doctors suggested further that the summaries of the other modules of the history be revised and shortened to make it easier for them to focus on clinical issues in the order of their preference.

Test-retest reliability in a computer-based medical history.

The authors developed a computer-based medical history for patients to take in their homes via the internet. The history consists of 232 'primary' questions asked of all patients, together with more than 6000 questions, explanations, and suggestions that are available for presentation as determined by a patient's responses. The purpose of this research was to measure the test-retest reliability of the 215 primary questions that have preformatted, mutually exclusive responses of 'Yes,' 'No,' 'Uncertain (Don't know, Maybe),' 'Don't understand,' and 'I'd rather not answer.' From randomly selected patients of doctors affiliated with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, 48 patients took the history twice with intervals between sessions ranging from 1 to 35 days (mean 7 days; median 5 days). High levels of test-retest reliability were found for most of the questions, but as a result of this study the authors revised five questions. They recommend that structured medical history questions that will be asked of many patients be measured for test-retest reliability before they are put into widespread clinical practice.