Real-Time Electronic Patient Portal Use Among Emergency Department Patients.

Importance: Patients with inequitable access to patient portals frequently present to emergency departments (EDs) for care. Little is known about portal use patterns among ED patients. Objectives: To describe real-time patient portal usage trends among ED patients and compare demographic and clinical characteristics between portal users and nonusers. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study of 12 teaching and 24 academic-affiliated EDs from 8 health systems in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington, patient portal access and usage data were evaluated for all ED patients 18 years or older between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022. Exposure: Use of the patient portal during ED visit. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the weekly proportions of ED patients who logged into the portal, viewed test results, and viewed clinical notes in real time. Pooled random-effects models were used to evaluate temporal trends and demographic and clinical characteristics associated with real-time portal use. Results: The study included 1 280 924 unique patient encounters (53.5% female; 0.6% American Indian or Alaska Native, 3.7% Asian, 18.0% Black, 10.7% Hispanic, 0.4% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 66.5% White, 10.0% other race, and 4.0% with missing race or ethnicity; 91.2% English-speaking patients; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [19.2] years). During the study, 17.4% of patients logged into the portal while in the ED, whereas 14.1% viewed test results and 2.5% viewed clinical notes. The odds of accessing the portal (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19-1.56), viewing test results (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30-2.04), and viewing clinical notes (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.19-2.15) were higher at the end of the study vs the beginning. Patients with active portal accounts at ED arrival had a higher odds of logging into the portal (OR, 17.73; 95% CI, 9.37-33.56), viewing test results (OR, 18.50; 95% CI, 9.62-35.57), and viewing clinical notes (OR, 18.40; 95% CI, 10.31-32.86). Patients who were male, Black, or without commercial insurance had lower odds of logging into the portal, viewing results, and viewing clinical notes. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that real-time patient portal use during ED encounters has increased over time, but disparities exist in portal access that mirror trends in portal usage more generally. Given emergency medicine's role in caring for medically underserved patients, there are opportunities for EDs to enroll and train patients in using patient portals to promote engagement during and after their visits.

Enhanced Patient Portal Engagement Associated with Improved Weight Loss Outcomes in Post-Bariatric Surgery Patients.

Background: Bariatric surgery is an effective intervention for obesity, but it requires comprehensive postoperative self-management to achieve optimal outcomes. While patient portals are generally seen as beneficial in engaging patients in health management, the link between their use and post-bariatric surgery weight loss remains unclear. Objective: This study investigated the association between patient portal engagement and postoperative body mass index (BMI) reduction among bariatric surgery patients. Methods: This retrospective longitudinal study included patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) between January 2018 and March 2021. Using generalized estimating equations, we estimated the association between active days of postoperative patient portal use and the reduction of BMI percentage (%BMI) at 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery. Covariates included duration since surgery, the patient's age at the time of surgery, gender, race and ethnicity, type of bariatric surgery, severity of comorbid conditions, and socioeconomic disadvantage. Results: The study included 1,415 patients, mostly female (80.9%), with diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. 805 (56.9%) patients underwent RYGB and 610 (43.1%) underwent SG. By one-year post-surgery, the mean (SD) %BMI reduction was 31.1% (8.3%), and the mean (SD) number of patient portal active days was 61.0 (41.2). A significantly positive association was observed between patient portal engagement and %BMI reduction, with variations revealed over time. Each 10-day increment of active portal use was associated with a 0.57% ([95% CI: 0.42- 0.72], P < .001) and 0.35% ([95% CI: 0.22- 0.49], P < .001) %BMI reduction at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. The association was not statistically significant at 12 months postoperatively (ß=-0.07, [95% CI: -0.24- 0.09], P = .54). Various portal functions, including messaging, visits, my record, medical tools, billing, resources, and others, were positively associated with %BMI reduction at 3- and 6-months follow-ups. Conclusions: Greater patient portal engagement, which may represent stronger adherence to postoperative instructions, better self-management of health, and enhanced communication with care teams, was associated with improved postoperative weight loss. Future investigations are needed to identify important portal features that contribute to the long-term success of weight loss management.

Telehealth and Technology: New Directions in Cancer Care.

ABSTRACT: Telehealth is a broad concept that refers to any delivery of health care in real time using technologies to connect people or information that are not in the same physical location. Until fairly recently, telehealth was more aspiration than reality. This situation changed radically due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a near-overnight inability for patients to be seen for routine management of chronic health conditions, including those with cancer. The purpose of this brief narrative review is to outline some areas where emerging and future technology may allow for innovations with specific implications for people with a current or past diagnosis of cancer, including underserved and/or historically excluded populations. Specific topics of telehealth are broadly covered in other areas of the special issue.

The 21st Century Cures Act Information Blocking Rule in Post-Acute Long-Term Care.

Included as part of the 21st Century Cures Act, the information blocking rule entered the first compliance phase in April 2021. Under this rule, post-acute long-term care (PALTC) facilities must not engage in any activity that interferes with accessing, using, or exchanging electronic health information. In addition, facilities must respond to information requests in a timely fashion and allow records to be readily available to patients and their delegates. Although hospitals have been slow to adapt to these changes, skilled nursing and other PALTC centers have been even slower. With a Final Rule enacted in recent years, awareness of the information-blocking rules became more crucial. We believe this commentary will help our colleagues interpret the rule for the PALTC setting. In addition, we provide points of emphasis to help guide those providers and administrative staff workers toward compliance and avoid potential penalties.

Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Implementing Core Electronic Health Record Use Metrics for Ambulatory Care: Virtual Consensus Conference Proceedings.

Precise, reliable, valid metrics that are cost-effective and require reasonable implementation time and effort are needed to drive electronic health record (EHR) improvements and decrease EHR burden. Differences exist between research and vendor definitions of metrics. PROCESS: We convened three stakeholder groups (health system informatics leaders, EHR vendor representatives, and researchers) in a virtual workshop series to achieve consensus on barriers, solutions, and next steps to implementing the core EHR use metrics in ambulatory care. CONCLUSION: Actionable solutions identified to address core categories of EHR metric implementation challenges include: (1) maintaining broad stakeholder engagement, (2) reaching agreement on standardized measure definitions across vendors, (3) integrating clinician perspectives, and (4) addressing cognitive and EHR burden. Building upon the momentum of this workshop's outputs offers promise for overcoming barriers to implementing EHR use metrics.

Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule.

Importance: The 21st Century Cures Act includes an information-blocking rule (IBR) that requires health systems to provide patients with immediate access to their health information in the electronic medical record upon request. Patients accessing their health information before they receive an explanation from their health care team may experience confusion and may be more likely to share unsolicited patient complaints (UPCs) with their health care organization. Objective: To evaluate the quantity of UPCs about physicians before and after IBR implementation and to identify themes in UPCs that may identify patient confusion, fear, or anger related to the release of information. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted with an interrupted time-series analysis of UPCs spanning January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. The data were obtained from a single academic medical center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, at which the IBR was implemented on January 20, 2021. Data analysis was performed from January 11 to July 15, 2023. Exposure: Implementation of the IBR on January 20, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the monthly rate of UPCs before and after IBR implementation. A qualitative analysis was performed for UPCs received after IBR implementation. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare monthly complaints between the pre- and post-IBR groups. The Pearson χ2 test was used to compare proportions of complaints by UPC category between time periods. Results: The medical center received 8495 UPCs during the study period: 3022 over 12 months before and 5473 over 18 months after institutional IBR implementation. There was no difference in the monthly proportions of UPCs per 1000 patient encounters before (median, 0.81 [IQR, 0.75-0.88]) and after (median, 0.83 [IQR, 0.77-0.89]) IBR implementation (difference in medians, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.07]; P =.86). Segmented regression analysis revealed no difference in monthly UPCs (ß [SE], 0.03 [0.09]; P =.72). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, implementation of the Cures Act IBR was not associated with an increase in monthly rates of UPCs. These findings suggest that review of UPCs identified as IBR-specific complaints may allow clinicians and organizations to prepare patients that their test and procedure results may be available before clinicians are able to review them and respond.

Conducting inclusive research in genetics for transgender, gender-diverse, and sex-diverse individuals: Case analyses and recommendations from a clinical genomics study.

A person's phenotypic sex (i.e., endogenous expression of primary, secondary, and endocrinological sex characteristics) can impact crucial aspects of genetic assessment and resulting clinical care recommendations. In studies with genetics components, it is critical to collect phenotypic sex, information about current organ/tissue inventory and hormonal milieu, and gender identity. If researchers do not carefully construct data models, transgender, gender diverse, and sex diverse (TGSD) individuals may be given inappropriate care recommendations and/or be subjected to misgendering, inflicting medical and psychosocial harms. The recognized need for an inclusive care experience should not be limited to clinical practice but should extend to the research setting, where researchers must build an inclusive experience for TGSD participants. Here, we review three TGSD participants in the Family History and Cancer Risk Study (FOREST) to critically evaluate sex- and gender-related survey measures and associated data models in a study seeking to identify patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Furthermore, we leverage these participants' responses to sex- and gender identity-related questions in FOREST to inform needed changes to the FOREST data model and to make recommendations for TGSD-inclusive genetics research design, data models, and processes.

The State-of-the-Art of Patient Portals: Adapting to External Factors, Addressing Barriers, and Innovating.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent external factors-the 21st Century Cures Act and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic-have stimulated major changes in the patient portal landscape. The objective of this state-of-the-art review is to describe recent developments in the patient portal literature and to identify recommendations and future directions for the design, implementation, and evaluation of portals. METHODS: To focus this review on salient contemporary issues, we elected to center it on four topics: (1) 21st Century Cures Act's impact on patient portals (e.g., Open Notes); (2) COVID-19's pandemic impact on portals; (3) proxy access to portals; and (4) disparities in portal adoption and use. We conducted targeted PubMed searches to identify recent empirical studies addressing these topics, used a two-part screening process to determine relevance, and conducted thematic analyses. RESULTS: Our search identified 174 unique papers, 74 were relevant empirical studies and included in this review. Among these papers, we identified 10 themes within our four a priori topics, including preparing for and understanding the consequences of increased patient access to their electronic health information (Cures Act); developing, deploying, and evaluating new virtual care processes (COVID-19); understanding current barriers to formal proxy use (proxy access); and addressing disparities in portal adoption and use (disparities). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the recent trends toward understanding the implications of immediate access to most test results, exploring ways to close gaps in portal adoption and use among different sub-populations, and finding ways to leverage portals to improve health and health care are the next steps in the maturation of patient portals and are key areas that require more research. It is important that health care organizations share their innovative portal efforts, so that successful measures can be tested in other contexts, and progress can continue.

Impact of notification policy on patient-before-clinician review of immediately released test results.

The 21st Century Cures Act mandates immediate availability of test results upon request. The Cures Act does not require that patients be informed of results, but many organizations send notifications when results become available. Our medical center implemented 2 sequential policies: immediate notifications for all results, and notifications only to patients who opt in. We used over 2 years of data from Vanderbilt University Medical Center to measure the effect of these policies on rates of patient-before-clinician result review and patient-initiated messaging using interrupted time series analysis. When releasing test results with immediate notification, the proportion of patient-before-clinician review increased 4-fold and the proportion of patients who sent messages rose 3%. After transition to opt-in notifications, patient-before-clinician review decreased 2.4% and patient-initiated messaging decreased 0.4%. Replacing automated notifications with an opt-in policy provides patients flexibility to indicate their preferences but may not substantially alleviate clinicians' messaging workload.

Eliciting Insights From Chat Logs of the 25X5 Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden: Novel Application of Topic Modeling.

BACKGROUND: Addressing clinician documentation burden through "targeted solutions" is a growing priority for many organizations ranging from government and academia to industry. Between January and February 2021, the 25 by 5: Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden on US Clinicians by 75% (25X5 Symposium) convened across 2 weekly 2-hour sessions among experts and stakeholders to generate actionable goals for reducing clinician documentation over the next 5 years. Throughout this web-based symposium, we passively collected attendees' contributions to a chat functionality-with their knowledge that the content would be deidentified and made publicly available. This presented a novel opportunity to synthesize and understand participants' perceptions and interests from chat messages. We performed a content analysis of 25X5 Symposium chat logs to identify themes about reducing clinician documentation burden. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore unstructured chat log content from the web-based 25X5 Symposium to elicit latent insights on clinician documentation burden among clinicians, health care leaders, and other stakeholders using topic modeling. METHODS: Across the 6 sessions, we captured 1787 messages among 167 unique chat participants cumulatively; 14 were private messages not included in the analysis. We implemented a latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic model on the aggregated dataset to identify clinician documentation burden topics mentioned in the chat logs. Coherence scores and manual examination informed optimal model selection. Next, 5 domain experts independently and qualitatively assigned descriptive labels to model-identified topics and classified them into higher-level categories, which were finalized through a panel consensus. RESULTS: We uncovered ten topics using the LDA model: (1) determining data and documentation needs (422/1773, 23.8%); (2) collectively reassessing documentation requirements in electronic health records (EHRs) (252/1773, 14.2%); (3) focusing documentation on patient narrative (162/1773, 9.1%); (4) documentation that adds value (147/1773, 8.3%); (5) regulatory impact on clinician burden (142/1773, 8%); (6) improved EHR user interface and design (128/1773, 7.2%); (7) addressing poor usability (122/1773, 6.9%); (8) sharing 25X5 Symposium resources (122/1773, 6.9%); (9) capturing data related to clinician practice (113/1773, 6.4%); and (10) the role of quality measures and technology in burnout (110/1773, 6.2%). Among these 10 topics, 5 high-level categories emerged: consensus building (821/1773, 46.3%), burden sources (365/1773, 20.6%), EHR design (250/1773, 14.1%), patient-centered care (162/1773, 9.1%), and symposium comments (122/1773, 6.9%). CONCLUSIONS: We conducted a topic modeling analysis on 25X5 Symposium multiparticipant chat logs to explore the feasibility of this novel application and elicit additional insights on clinician documentation burden among attendees. Based on the results of our LDA analysis, consensus building, burden sources, EHR design, and patient-centered care may be important themes to consider when addressing clinician documentation burden. Our findings demonstrate the value of topic modeling in discovering topics associated with clinician documentation burden using unstructured textual content. Topic modeling may be a suitable approach to examine latent themes presented in web-based symposium chat logs.

Empowering patients to address diabetes care gaps: formative usability testing of a novel patient portal intervention.

Objective: The aim of this study was to design and assess the formative usability of a novel patient portal intervention designed to empower patients with diabetes to initiate orders for diabetes-related monitoring and preventive services. Materials and Methods: We used a user-centered Design Sprint methodology to create our intervention prototype and assess its usability with 3 rounds of iterative testing. Participants (5/round) were presented with the prototype and asked to perform common, standardized tasks using think-aloud procedures. A facilitator rated task performance using a scale: (1) completed with ease, (2) completed with difficulty, and (3) failed. Participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) scored 0-worst to 100-best. All testing occurred remotely via Zoom. Results: We identified 3 main categories of usability issues: distrust about the automated system, content concerns, and layout difficulties. Changes included improving clarity about the ordering process and simplifying language; however, design constraints inherent to the electronic health record system limited our ability to respond to all usability issues (eg, could not modify fixed elements in layout). Percent of tasks completed with ease across each round were 67%, 60%, and 80%, respectively. Average SUS scores were 87, 74, and 93, respectively. Across rounds, participants found the intervention valuable and appreciated the concept of patient-initiated ordering. Conclusions: Through iterative user-centered design and testing, we improved the usability of the patient portal intervention. A tool that empowers patients to initiate orders for disease-specific services as part of their existing patient portal account has potential to enhance the completion of recommended health services and improve clinical outcomes.

Perspectives of Patients About Immediate Access to Test Results Through an Online Patient Portal.

Importance: The 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule mandates the immediate electronic availability of test results to patients, likely empowering them to better manage their health. Concerns remain about unintended effects of releasing abnormal test results to patients. Objective: To assess patient and caregiver attitudes and preferences related to receiving immediately released test results through an online patient portal. Design, Setting, and Participants: This large, multisite survey study was conducted at 4 geographically distributed academic medical centers in the US using an instrument adapted from validated surveys. The survey was delivered in May 2022 to adult patients and care partners who had accessed test results via an online patient portal account between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022. Exposures: Access to test results via a patient portal between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Responses to questions related to demographics, test type and result, reaction to result, notification experience and future preferences, and effect on health and well-being were aggregated. To evaluate characteristics associated with patient worry, logistic regression and pooled random-effects models were used to assess level of worry as a function of whether test results were perceived by patients as normal or not normal and whether patients were precounseled. Results: Of 43 380 surveys delivered, there were 8139 respondents (18.8%). Most respondents were female (5129 [63.0%]) and spoke English as their primary language (7690 [94.5%]). The median age was 64 years (IQR, 50-72 years). Most respondents (7520 of 7859 [95.7%]), including 2337 of 2453 individuals (95.3%) who received nonnormal results, preferred to immediately receive test results through the portal. Few respondents (411 of 5473 [7.5%]) reported that reviewing results before they were contacted by a health care practitioner increased worry, though increased worry was more common among respondents who received abnormal results (403 of 2442 [16.5%]) than those whose results were normal (294 of 5918 [5.0%]). The result of the pooled model for worry as a function of test result normality was statistically significant (odds ratio [OR], 2.71; 99% CI, 1.96-3.74), suggesting an association between worry and nonnormal results. The result of the pooled model evaluating the association between worry and precounseling was not significant (OR, 0.70; 99% CI, 0.31-1.59). Conclusions and Relevance: In this multisite survey study of patient attitudes and preferences toward receiving immediately released test results via a patient portal, most respondents preferred to receive test results via the patient portal despite viewing results prior to discussion with a health care professional. This preference persisted among patients with nonnormal results.

State-by-State Variability in Adolescent Privacy Laws.

OBJECTIVES: Health care providers managing the complex health needs of adolescents must comply with state laws governing adolescent consent and right to privacy. However, these laws vary. Our objectives were to summarize consent and privacy laws state-by-state and assess the implications of variation for compliance with the 21st Century Cures Act and with evidence-based guidance on adolescent care. METHODS: We summarized state laws and regulations on minor consent for the following: health services, substance abuse treatment, prenatal care, mental health care, contraceptive management, immunizations, sexually transmitted infection management, human immunodeficiency viruses testing and treatment, dental care, and sexual assault evaluation. We compared state laws and regulations with American Academy of Pediatrics' evidence-based guidelines to assess consistencies in guidance. RESULTS: We observed notable state-by-state variability in laws governing consent for adolescent patients. No states had identical policies for all services studied. For example, although all states had provisions for consent to management of sexually transmitted infections, there were variable specifications in the age and type of minor, whether this includes human immunodeficiency viruses, and whether confidentiality is protected. Providing confidential care to the adolescent patient has been set as a priority by medical societies; however, guidelines are limited by the need to comply with state laws and regulations. CONCLUSIONS: State laws on consent and privacy for adolescents are highly variable, and many do not reflect pediatric professional standards of care. This inconsistency is a barrier to operationalizing a consistent and equitable experience providing evidence-based medical care and ensuring adolescent privacy protection.

Clinician and Health Care Leaders' Experiences with-and Perceptions of-COVID-19 Documentation Reduction Policies and Practices.

BACKGROUND: Substantial strategies to reduce clinical documentation were implemented by health care systems throughout the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at national and local levels. This natural experiment provides an opportunity to study the impact of documentation reduction strategies on documentation burden among clinicians and other health professionals in the United States. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess clinicians' and other health care leaders' experiences with and perceptions of COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies and identify which implemented strategies should be prioritized and remain permanent post-pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a national survey of clinicians and health care leaders to understand COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies implemented during the pandemic using snowball sampling through professional networks, listservs, and social media. We developed and validated a 19-item survey leveraging existing post-COVID-19 policy and practice recommendations proposed by Sinsky and Linzer. Participants rated reduction strategies for impact on documentation burden on a scale of 0 to 100. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 351 surveys initiated, 193 (55%) were complete. Most participants were informaticians and/or clinicians and worked for a health system or in academia. A majority experienced telehealth expansion (81.9%) during the pandemic, which participants also rated as highly impactful (60.1-61.5) and preferred that it remain (90.5%). Implemented at lower proportions, documenting only pertinent positives to reduce note bloat (66.1 ± 28.3), changing compliance rules and performance metrics to eliminate those without evidence of net benefit (65.7 ± 26.3), and electronic health record (EHR) optimization sprints (64.3 ± 26.9) received the highest impact scores compared with other strategies presented; support for these strategies widely ranged (49.7-63.7%). CONCLUSION: The results of this survey suggest there are many perceived sources of and solutions for documentation burden. Within strategies, we found considerable support for telehealth, documenting pertinent positives, and changing compliance rules. We also found substantial variation in the experience of documentation burden among participants.

Open notes sounds great, but will a provider's documentation change? An exploratory study of the effect of open notes on oncology documentation.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of shared clinical notes on patients, care partners, and clinicians ("open notes") were first studied as a demonstration project in 2010. Since then, multiple studies have shown clinicians agree shared progress notes are beneficial to patients, and patients and care partners report benefits from reading notes. To determine if implementing open notes at a hematology/oncology practice changed providers' documentation style, we assessed the length and readability of clinicians' notes before and after open notes implementation at an academic medical center in Boston, MA, USA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 143 888 notes from 60 hematology/oncology clinicians before and after the open notes debut at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, from January 1, 2012 to September 1, 2016. We measured the providers' (medical doctor/nurse practitioner) documentation styles by analyzing character length, the number of addenda, note entry mode (dictated vs typed), and note readability. Measurements used 5 different readability formulas and were assessed on notes written before and after the introduction of open notes on November 25, 2013. RESULTS: After the introduction of open notes, the mean length of progress notes increased from 6174 characters to 6648 characters (P < .001), and the mean character length of the "assessment and plan" (A&P) increased from 1435 characters to 1597 characters (P < .001). The Average Grade Level Readability of progress notes decreased from 11.50 to 11.33, and overall readability improved by 0.17 (P = .01). There were no statistically significant changes in the length or readability of "Initial Notes" or Letters, inter-doctor communication, nor in the modality of the recording of any kind of note. CONCLUSIONS: After the implementation of open notes, progress notes and A&P sections became both longer and easier to read. This suggests clinician documenters may be responding to the perceived pressures of a transparent medical records environment.

Before-Visit Questionnaire: A Tool to Augment Communication and Decrease Provider Documentation Burden in Pediatric Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate an electronic tool that collects interval history and incorporates it into a provider summary note. METHODS: A parent-facing online before-visit questionnaire (BVQ) collected information from parents and caregivers of pediatric diabetes patients prior to a clinic encounter. This information was related to interval history and perceived self-management barriers. The BVQ generated a summary note that providers could paste in their own documentation. Parents also completed postvisit experience questionnaires. We assessed the BVQs perceived usefulness to parents and providers and compared provider documentation content and length pre- and post-BVQ rollout. We interviewed providers regarding their experiences with the system-generated note. RESULTS: Seventy-three parents of diabetic children were recruited and completed the BVQ. A total of 79% of parents stated that the BVQ helped with visit preparation and 80% said it improved perceived quality of visits. All 16 participating providers reviewed BVQs prior to patient encounters and 100% considered the summary beneficial. Most providers (81%) desired summaries less than 1 week old. A total of 69% of providers preferred the prose version of the summary; however, 75% also viewed the bulleted version as preferable for provider review. Analysis of provider notes revealed that BVQs increased provider documentation of patients' adherence and barriers. We observed a 50% reduction in typing by providers to document interval histories. Providers not using summaries typed an average of 137 words (standard deviation [SD]: 74) to document interval history compared with 68 words [SD 47] typed with BVQ use. DISCUSSION: Providers and parents of children with diabetes appreciated the use of previsit, parent-completed BVQs that automatically produced provider documentation. Despite the BVQ redistributing work from providers to parents, its use was acceptable to both groups. CONCLUSION: Parent-completed questionnaires on the patient's behalf that generate provider documentation encourage communication between parents and providers regarding disease management and reduce provider workload.

Patient Perceptions of Receiving COVID-19 Test Results via an Online Patient Portal: An Open Results Survey.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, attention has been focused on "open notes" and "open results" since the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology implemented the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule on information blocking. Open notes is an established best practice, but open results remains controversial, especially for diseases associated with stigma, morbidity, and mortality. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with all three of these effects and represents an ideal disease for the study of open results for sensitive test results. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates patient perspectives related to receiving COVID-19 test results via an online patient portal prior to discussion with a clinician. METHODS: We surveyed adults who underwent COVID-19 testing between March 1, 2020 and October 21, 2020 who agreed to be directly contacted about COVID-19-related research about their perspectives on receiving test results via a patient portal. We evaluated user roles (i.e., patient vs. care partner), demographic information, ease of use, impact of immediate release, notification of results, impact of viewing results on health management, and importance of sharing results with others. RESULTS: Users were mostly patients themselves. Users found the portal easy to use but expressed mixed preferences about the means of notification of result availability (e.g., email, text, or phone call). Users found immediate access to results useful for managing their health, employment, and family/childcare. Many users shared their results and encouraged others to get tested. Our cohort consisted mostly of non-Hispanic white, highly educated, English-speaking patients. CONCLUSION: Overall, patients found open results useful for COVID-19 testing and few expressed increased worries from receiving their results via the patient portal. The demographics of our cohort highlight the need for further research in patient portal equity in the age of open results.

The My Diabetes Care Patient Portal Intervention: Usability and Pre-Post Assessment.

BACKGROUND: My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a novel, multifaceted patient portal intervention designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-management. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, and provides literacy level-appropriate educational resources. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the usability, acceptability, perceptions, and potential impact of MDC. METHODS: We recruited 69 participants from four clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants were given 1 month of access to MDC and completed pre- and post-questionnaires including validated measures of usability and patient activation, and questions about user experience. RESULTS: Sixty participants completed the study. Participants' mean age was 58, 55% were females, 68% were Caucasians, and 48% had limited health literacy (HL). Most participants (80%) visited MDC three or more times and 50% spent a total of ≥15 minutes on MDC. Participants' median System Usability Scale (SUS) score was 78.8 [Q1, Q3: 72.5, 87.5] and significantly greater than the threshold value of 68 indicative of "above average" usability (p < 0.001). The median SUS score of patients with limited HL was similar to those with adequate HL (77.5 [72.5, 85.0] vs. 82.5 [72.5, 92.5]; p = 0.41). Participants most commonly reported the literacy level-appropriate educational links and health data infographics as features that helped them better understand their diabetes health data (65%). All participants (100%) intended to continue to use MDC. Median Patient Activation Measure® scores increased postintervention (64.3 [55.6, 72.5] vs. 67.8 [60.6, 75.0]; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Participants, including those with limited HL, rated the usability of MDC above average, anticipated continued use, and identified key features that improved their understanding of diabetes health data. Patient activation improved over the study period. Our findings suggest MDC may be a beneficial addition to existing patient portals.