Systematic Analysis of Extracting Data on Advance Directives from Patient Electronic Health Records (EHR) in Terminal Oncology Patients.

BACKGROUND: Advance directives are legal documents that include living wills and durable health care power of attorney documents. They are critical components of care for seriously ill patients which are designed to be implemented when a patient is terminally ill and incapacitated. We sought to evaluate potential reasons for why advance directives were not appropriately implemented, by reviewing the electronic health record (EHR) in patients with terminal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the EHR of 500 cancer patients from 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2016 was performed. Data points were manually collected and entered in a central database. RESULTS: Of the 500 patients, 160 (32%) had an advance directive (AD). The most common clinical terminology used by physicians indicating a terminal diagnosis was progressive (36.6%) and palliative (31%). The most common clinical terminology indicating incapacity was altered mental status (25.6%), and not oriented (14%). 34 (6.8%) patients met all criteria of having a terminal diagnosis, a documented AD, and were deemed incapacitated. Of these patients who met all of these data points, their ADs were implemented on average 1.7 days (SD: 4.4 days) after which they should have been. This resulted in a total of 58 days of additional care provided. DISCUSSION: This study provided insight on to how ADs are managed in day to day practice in the hospital. From our analysis it appears that physicians are able to identify when a patient is terminal, however, it is typically later than it should have been recognized. Further studies should be performed focusing on harnessing the power of the EHR and providing physicians formative and evaluative feedback of practice patterns to ensure that ADs are honored when appropriate.

An Electronic Tool to Support Patient-Centered Broad Consent: A Multi-Arm Randomized Clinical Trial in Family Medicine.

PURPOSE: Patients are frequently asked to share their personal health information. The objective of this study was to compare the effects on patient experiences of 3 electronic consent (e-consent) versions asking patients to share their health records for research. METHODS: A multi-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted from November 2017 through November 2018. Adult patients (n = 734) were recruited from 4 family medicine clinics in Florida. Using a tablet computer, participants were randomized to (1) a standard e-consent (standard), (2) an e-consent containing standard information plus hyperlinks to additional interactive details (interactive), or (3) an e-consent containing standard information, interactive hyperlinks, and factual messages about data protections and researcher training (trust-enhanced). Satisfaction (1 to 5), subjective understanding (0 to 100), and other outcomes were measured immediately, at 1 week, and at 6 months. RESULTS: A majority of participants (94%) consented to future uses of their health record information for research. No differences in study outcomes between versions were observed at immediate or 1-week follow-up. At 6-month follow-up, compared with the standard e-consent, participants who used the interactive e-consent reported greater satisfaction (B = 0.43; SE = 0.09; P <.001) and subjective understanding (B = 18.04; SE = 2.58; P <.001). At 6-month follow-up, compared with the interactive e-consent, participants who used the trust-enhanced e-consent reported greater satisfaction (B = 0.9; SE = 1.0; P <.001) and subjective understanding (B = 32.2; SE = 2.6, P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who used e-consents with interactive research details and trust-enhancing messages reported higher satisfaction and understanding at 6-month follow-up. Research institutions should consider developing and further validating e-consents that interactively deliver information beyond that required by federal regulations, including facts that may enhance patient trust in research.

Does an interactive trust-enhanced electronic consent improve patient experiences when asked to share their health records for research? A randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the context of patient broad consent for future research uses of their identifiable health record data, we compare the effectiveness of interactive trust-enhanced e-consent, interactive-only e-consent, and standard e-consent (no interactivity, no trust enhancement). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted involving adult participants making a scheduled primary care visit. Participants were randomized into 1 of the 3 e-consent conditions. Primary outcomes were patient-reported satisfaction with and subjective understanding of the e-consent. Secondary outcomes were objective knowledge, perceived voluntariness, trust in medical researchers, consent decision, and time spent using the application. Outcomes were assessed immediately after use of the e-consent and at 1-week follow-up. RESULTS: Across all conditions, participants (N = 734) reported moderate-to-high satisfaction with consent (mean 4.3 of 5) and subjective understanding (79.1 of 100). Over 94% agreed to share their health record data. No statistically significant differences in outcomes were observed between conditions. Irrespective of condition, black participants and those with lower education reported lower satisfaction, subjective understanding, knowledge, perceived voluntariness, and trust in medical researchers, as well as spent more time consenting. CONCLUSIONS: A large majority of patients were willing to share their identifiable health records for research, and they reported positive consent experiences. However, incorporating optional additional information and messages designed to enhance trust in the research process did not improve consent experiences. To improve poorer consent experiences of racial and ethnic minority participants and those with lower education, other novel consent technologies and processes may be valuable. (An Interactive Patient-Centered Consent for Research Using Medical Records; NCT03063268).

Patient preferences toward an interactive e-consent application for research using electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess patient perceptions of using an interactive electronic consent (e-consent) application when deciding whether or not to grant broad consent for research use of their identifiable electronic health record (EHR) information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this qualitative study, we conducted a series of 42 think-aloud interviews with 32 adults. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: We identified themes related to patient preferences, reservations, and mixed attitudes toward consenting electronically; low- and high-information-seeking behavior; and an emphasis on reassuring information, such as data protections and prohibitions against sharing data with pharmaceutical companies. Participants expressed interest in the types of information contained in their EHRs, safeguards protecting EHR data, and specifics on studies that might use their EHR data. DISCUSSION: This study supports the potential value of interactive e-consent applications that allow patients to customize their consent experience. This study also highlights that some people have concerns about e-consent platforms and desire more detailed information about administrative processes and safeguards that protect EHR data used in research. CONCLUSION: This study contributes new insights on how e-consent applications could be designed to ensure that patients' information needs are met when seeking consent for research use of health record information. Also, this study offers a potential electronic approach to meeting the new Common Rule requirement that consent documents contain a "concise and focused" presentation of key information followed by more details.