Accuracy of self-perceived risk for common conditions.

BACKGROUND: Accurate awareness of common disease risk is necessary to promote healthy lifestyles and to prevent unnecessary anxiety and evaluation. Our objective is to identify characteristics of patients who do not accurately perceive their risk of developing coronary heart disease (CHD), diabetes (DM), breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Using personalized disease risk reports and risk perception surveys, subjects (n = 4703) were classified as high or low/average risk and high or low/average perceived risk for each condition. Models were used to examine factors associated with risk under-estimation by high risk patients and risk over-estimation by low/average risk patients. RESULTS: Patients at high risk for DM, BC and CRC often (60%-75% of the time) under-estimated their risk, while low/average risk patients overestimated their risk 13%-40% of the time. For CHD, under-estimation by high risk individuals approximated over-estimation by low/average individuals. Compared to normal weight patients at high risk for cancer, obese patients were more likely to under-estimate their risk for BC (OR 3.1, CI 1.9-5.0) and CRC (2.6, 1.5-4.5) as were overweight patients. Overweight and obese patients at low/average risk of DM or CHD were more likely than normal weight patients to over-estimate their risk. Low/average risk women were more likely than men to over-estimate their risk of DM (1.3, 1.1-1.5) and CHD (1.8, 1.5-2.1). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that body mass index is the factor most consistently associated with incorrect risk perceptions for several common conditions.

A Cluster Randomized Trial of a Personalized Multi-Condition Risk Assessment in Primary Care.

INTRODUCTION: Personal risk for multiple conditions should be assessed in primary care. This study evaluated whether collection of risk factors to generate electronic health record (EHR)-linked health risk appraisal (HRA) for coronary heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer was associated with improved patient-provider communication, risk assessment, and plans for breast cancer screening. METHODS: This pragmatic trial recruited adults with upcoming visits to 11 primary care practices during 2013-2014 (N=3,703). Pre-visit, intervention patients completed a risk factor and perception assessment and received an HRA; coded risk factor data were sent to the EHR. Post-visit, intervention patients reported risk perception. Pre-visit, control patients only completed the risk perception assessment; post-visit they also completed the risk factor assessment and received the HRA. No data were sent to the EHR for controls. Accuracy/improvement of self-perceived risk was assessed by comparing self-perceived to calculated risk. RESULTS: The intervention was associated with improvement of patient-provider communication of changes to improve health (78.5% vs 74.1%, AOR=1.67, 99% CI=1.07, 2.60). There was a similar trend for discussion of risk (54.1% vs 45.5%, AOR=1.34, 95% CI=0.97, 1.85). The intervention was associated with greater improvement in accuracy of self-perceived risk for diabetes (16.0% vs 12.6%, p=0.006) and colorectal cancer (27.9% vs 17.2%, p<0.001) with a similar trend for coronary heart disease and breast cancer. There were no changes in plans for breast cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported risk factors and EHR-linked multi-condition HRAs in primary care can modestly improve communication and promote accuracy of self-perceived risk.

A web-based, patient-centered toolkit to engage patients and caregivers in the acute care setting: a preliminary evaluation.

We implemented a web-based, patient-centered toolkit that engages patients/caregivers in the hospital plan of care by facilitating education and patient-provider communication. Of the 585 eligible patients approached on medical intensive care and oncology units, 239 were enrolled (119 patients, 120 caregivers). The most common reason for not approaching the patient was our inability to identify a health care proxy when a patient was incapacitated. Significantly more caregivers were enrolled in medical intensive care units compared with oncology units (75% vs 32%; P < .01). Of the 239 patient/caregivers, 158 (66%) and 97 (41%) inputted a daily and overall goal, respectively. Use of educational content was highest for medications and test results and infrequent for problems. The most common clinical theme identified in 291 messages sent by 158 patients/caregivers was health concerns, needs, preferences, or questions (19%, 55 of 291). The average system usability scores and satisfaction ratings of a sample of surveyed enrollees were favorable. From analysis of feedback, we identified barriers to adoption and outlined strategies to promote use.

Impact of incorporating pharmacy claims data into electronic medication reconciliation.

PURPOSE: The potential value of adding pharmacy claims data to the medication history in the electronic health record (EHR) to improve the accuracy of medication reconciliation was studied. METHODS: Three medication history sources were used for this evaluation: a gold-standard preadmission medication list (PAML) created by reviewing all available medication history information, an EHR-generated PAML, and pharmacy claims data. The study population consisted of patients from the Partners Medication Reconciliation Study with medication history information available from all three medication history sources. The aggregated medication list from each medication history source was compared with the gold-standard PAML to identify and categorize missing medications, additional medications, and discrepancies in the various attributes of a medication order, including dose, route, and frequency. McNemar's test was used to compare paired proportions of medication entries across each source to the gold-standard PAMLs. RESULTS: Fifteen patients had medication histories in all three medication history sources. Medication entries across all three sources included 169 from the gold- standard PAMLs, 158 from the EHR-PAMLs, and 351 from pharmacy claims data. The EHR-PAMLs and pharmacy claims data correctly reflected 52.1% and 43.2% of the gold-standard PAMLs, respectively. Combining the EHR-PAMLs and pharmacy claims resulted in 69.2% of the gold-standard PAMLs correctly reflected (p < 0.0001). Combining these two data sources increased the accuracy of medication history by 17.1%. CONCLUSION: Combining the EHR-PAML and pharmacy claims data resulted in a significant increase in the number of medications correctly reflected in the gold-standard PAML compared with the EHR-PAML or claims data separately.

Strategies for Managing Mobile Devices for Use by Hospitalized Inpatients.

Despite the potential advantages, implementation of mobile devices and ongoing management pose challenges in the hospital environment. Our team implemented the PROSPECT (Promoting Respect and Ongoing Safety through Patient-centeredness, Engagement, Communication and Technology) project at Brigham and Women's Hospital. The goal of PROSPECT is to transform the hospital environment by providing a suite of e-tools to facilitate teamwork among nurses, physicians, patients and to engage patients and care partners in their plan of care. In this paper, we describe the device-related decisions and challenges faced including device and accessory selection, integration, information and device security, infection control, user access, and ongoing operation and maintenance. We relate the strategies that we used for managing mobile devices and lessons learned based on our experiences.

Participatory Design and Development of a Patient-centered Toolkit to Engage Hospitalized Patients and Care Partners in their Plan of Care.

Patient engagement has been identified as a key strategy for improving patient outcomes. In this paper, we describe the development and pilot testing of a web-based patient centered toolkit (PCTK) prototype to improve access to health information and to engage hospitalized patients and caregivers in the plan of care. Individual and group interviews were used to identify plan of care functional and workflow requirements and user interface design enhancements. Qualitative methods within a participatory design approach supported the development of a PCTK prototype that will be implemented on intensive care and oncology units to engage patients and professional care team members developing their plan of care during an acute hospitalization.

Comparing electronic health record portals to obtain patient-entered family health history in primary care.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in developing systems to overcome barriers for acquiring and interpreting family health histories in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To examine the capacity of three different electronic portals to collect family history from patients and deposit valid data in an electronic health record (EHR). DESIGN: Pilot trial. PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTION: Patients were enrolled from four primary care practices and were asked to collect family health history before a physical exam using either telephone-based interactive voice response (IVR) technology, a secure Internet portal, or a waiting room laptop computer, with portal assigned by practice. Intervention practices were compared to a "usual care" practice, where there was no standard workflow to document family history (663 participants in the three intervention arms were compared to 296 participants from the control practice). MAIN MEASURES: New documentation of any family history in a coded EHR field within 30 days of the visit. Secondary outcomes included participation rates and validity. KEY RESULTS: Demographics varied by clinic. Documentation of new family history data was significantly higher, but modest, in each of the three intervention clinics (7.5 % for IVR clinic, 20.3 % for laptop clinic, and 23.1 % for patient portal clinic) versus the control clinic (1.7 %). Patient-entered data on common conditions in first degree relatives was confirmed as valid by a genetic counselor for the majority of cases (ranging from 64 to 82 % in the different arms). CONCLUSIONS: Within primary care practices, valid patient entered family health history data can be obtained electronically at higher rates than a standard of care that depends on provider-entered data. Further research is needed to determine how best to match different portals to individual patient preference, how the tools can best be integrated with provider workflow, and to assess how they impact the use of screening and prevention.

Use of a web-based risk appraisal tool for assessing family history and lifestyle factors in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Primary care clinicians can play an important role in identifying individuals at increased risk of cancer, but often do not obtain detailed information on family history or lifestyle factors from their patients. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of using a web-based risk appraisal tool in the primary care setting. DESIGN: Five primary care practices within an academic care network were assigned to the intervention or control group. PARTICIPANTS: We included 15,495 patients who had a new patient visit or annual exam during an 8-month period in 2010-2011. INTERVENTION: Intervention patients were asked to complete a web-based risk appraisal tool on a laptop computer immediately before their visit. Information on family history of cancer was sent to their electronic health record (EHR) for clinicians to view; if accepted, it populated coded fields and could trigger clinician reminders about colon and breast cancer screening. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome measure was new documentation of a positive family history of cancer in coded EHR fields. Secondary outcomes included clinician reminders about screening and discussion of family history, lifestyle factors, and screening. KEY RESULTS: Among eligible intervention patients, 2.0% had new information on family history of cancer entered in the EHR within 30 days after the visit, compared to 0.6% of eligible control patients (adjusted odds ratio = 4.3, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in the percent of patients who received moderate or high risk reminders for colon or breast cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Use of this tool was associated with increased documentation of family history of cancer in the EHR, although the percentage of patients with new family history information was low in both groups. Further research is needed to determine how risk appraisal tools can be integrated with workflow and how they affect screening and health behaviors.

Secondary use of electronic health record data: spontaneous triggered adverse drug event reporting.

PURPOSE: Physicians in the United States report fewer than 1% of adverse drug events (ADEs) to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but frequently document ADEs within electronic health records (EHRs). We developed and implemented a generalizable, scalable EHR-based system to automatically send electronic ADE reports to the FDA in real-time. METHODS: Proof-of-concept study involving 26 clinicians given access to EHR-based ADE reporting functionality from December 2008 to May 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Number and content of ADE reports; severity of adverse reactions (clinician and computer algorithm defined); clinician survey. RESULTS: During the study period, 26 clinicians submitted 217 reports to the FDA. The clinicians defined 23% of the ADEs as serious and a computer algorithm defined 4% of the ADEs as serious. The most common drug classes were cardiovascular drugs (40%), central nervous system drugs (19%), analgesics (13%), and endocrine drugs (7%). The reports contained information, pre-filled from the EHR, about comorbid conditions (207 reports [95%] listed 1899 comorbid conditions), concurrent medications (193 reports [89%] listed 1687 concurrent medications), weight (209 reports [96%]), and laboratory data (215 reports [99%]). It took clinicians a mean of 53 seconds to complete and send the form. In the clinician survey, 21 of 23 respondents (91%) said they had submitted zero ADE reports to the FDA in the prior 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: EHR-based, triggered ADE reporting is efficient and acceptable to clinicians, provides detailed clinical information, and has the potential to greatly increase the number and quality of spontaneous reports submitted to the FDA.

Challenges in exchanging medication information: identifying gaps in clinical document exchange and terminology standards.

The availability of accurate medication history information is invaluable for making sound therapeutic decisions. The Continuity of Care Document (CCD) could serve as a mechanism for exchanging interoperable medication information between EHRs. We evaluate the feasibility of representing a medication and its underlying components in a Healthcare Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP) compliant CCD. Our evaluation resulted in successfully mapping 94% of medication entries and greater than 92% of medication component mappings to CCD constraints. We identify gaps and provide recommendations for improving the representational adequacy of the Federal Medication Terminology (FMT) to fully represent orderable medication concepts.