An Effective Program to Reduce Malpractice Claims and Payments in a Large Orthopaedic Practice.

BACKGROUND: High reliability in health care requires a balance between intentionally designed systems and individual professional accountability. One element of accountability includes a process for addressing clinicians whose practices are associated with a disproportionate share of patient complaints. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the Patient Advocacy Reporting System (PARS), a tiered intervention model to reduce patient complaints about clinicians. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving a southeastern U.S. orthopaedic group practice. The study assessed the implementation of the PARS program and subsequent malpractice claims from 2004 to 2020. RESULTS: The implementation of PARS was associated with an 83% reduction in malpractice claims cost per high-risk clinician after intervention (p = 0.05; Wilcoxon rank sum test). The overall practice group experienced an 87% reduction in mean annual claims cost per clinician (p = 0.007; segmented regression). The successful adoption required essential elements such as PARS champions, peer messengers, an Office of Patient Affairs, and a clear statement of practice values and professionalism expectations at the time of onboarding. CONCLUSIONS: The PARS program was successfully adopted within a surgical specialty group as a part of ongoing risk prevention and management efforts. The period following PARS was associated with a retrospectively measured reduction in malpractice claim costs. The PARS program can be effectively implemented in a large, single-specialty orthopaedic practice setting and, although not necessarily causal, was, in our case, associated with a period of reduced malpractice claim costs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We have learned in previous research that there are clear links between professionalism and patient outcomes (e.g., surgical complications), but agree that the focus here on medical malpractice is not directly clinical.

A Proposed Approach to Allegations of Sexual Boundary Violation in Health Care.

BACKGROUND: Sexual boundary violations in the health care setting cause harm for victims, threaten an organization's culture, and create extraordinary organizational risk. The inherent complexities of health care organizations present unique challenges for the initial triage and response to reports of alleged violations. METHODS: A group of experts with experience in law, leadership, human resources, medicine, and health care operations identified processes for organizations to triage and implement an early response to allegations of sexual boundary violations. The group reviewed a series of 100 reports of alleged violations described by patients and coworkers from a 200-hospital professional accountability collaborative to identify the elements of an ideal initial triage and management approach. RESULTS: The group identified three domains to guide early triage and response to reports of boundary violations: (1) severity and acuity of the alleged violation; (2) roles and relationship(s) of the complainant, respondent, and other affected individuals; and (3) contextual information such as prior activity or other mitigating factors. The group identified leadership engagement; coordinated responses; clear articulation of values, policies, and procedures; aligned data reporting; thoughtful reviews; and securing appropriate resources as essential elements of an organization's response. CONCLUSION: A structured systematic approach to classify and respond to allegations of sexual boundary violation is described. The initial response should be guided by assessment of the severity and timing of the reported behavior, followed by assessment of roles and responsibilities with involvement of all relevant stakeholders. Contextual issues and special circumstances of relevance should be identified and incorporated into the response. Systems to identify, store, and retrieve behavior of concern should be improved and integrated.

Supporting the pursuit of professionalism during a crisis.

BACKGROUND: Crisis plans for healthcare organisations most often focus on operational needs including staffing, supplies and physical plant needs. Less attention is focused on how leaders can support and encourage individual clinical team members to conduct themselves as professionals during a crisis. METHODS: This qualitative study analysed observations from 79 leaders at 160 hospitals that participate in two national professionalism programmes who shared their observations in focus group discussions about what they believed were the essential elements of leading and addressing professional accountability during a crisis. RESULTS: Analysis of focus group responses identified six leadership practices adopted by healthcare organisations, which were felt to be essential for organisations to navigate the crisis successfully. Unique aspects of maintaining professionalism during each phase of the pandemic were identified and described. CONCLUSIONS: Leaders need a plan to support an organiation's pursuit of professionalism during a crisis. Leaders participating in this study identified practices that should be carefully woven into efforts to support the ongoing safety and quality of the care delivered by healthcare organisations before, during and after a crisis. The lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic may be useful during subsequent crises and challenges that a healthcare organisation might experience.

Balancing Rights and Responsibilities of Key Stakeholders in Addressing Reports of Disrespect Experienced by Patients.

Professionalism in health care occurs in environments that present complex ethical dilemmas that demand ideal individual and team performance. Clinicians who behave unprofessionally toward patients and family members create a disproportionate share of risk for adverse patient outcomes and malpractice claims. However, when made aware, the vast majority will self-regulate. Several options exist for a clinician who observes or hears about an interaction between a colleague and a patient or family member that does not seem to be consistent with the organization's commitment to treat individuals with respect and dignity. Responses to unprofessional behavior need to recognize and balance the rights and responsibilities of key stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, coworkers, and the organization. In one approach, the clinician would speak directly with the colleague to make them aware of the event and encourage them to consider alternative approaches in future similar interactions. Alternatively, the clinician could ensure that the story is reported, reviewed, and shared through the organization's professional accountability program. Professional accountability programs must be supported by appropriate infrastructure elements. Sharing the observation helps to address the concerns and fears of patients and family members, offers a colleague the chance to reflect and reduce the likelihood of future unprofessional behavior, and seeks to fulfill one's individual responsibility to support colleagues as professionals, while striking the right balance of dignity, respect, and pursuit of trust for all key stakeholders.

Professionalism of Admitting and Consulting Services and Trauma Patient Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether trauma patients managed by an admitting or consulting service with a high proportion of physicians exhibiting patterns of unprofessional behaviors are at greater risk of complications or death. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Trauma care requires high-functioning interdisciplinary teams where professionalism, particularly modeling respect and communicating effectively, is essential. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from 9 level I trauma centers that participated in a national trauma registry linked with data from a national database of unsolicited patient complaints. The cohort included trauma patients admitted January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2017. The exposure of interest was care by 1 or more high-risk services, defined as teams with a greater proportion of physicians with high numbers of patient complaints. The study outcome was death or complications within 30 days. RESULTS: Among the 71,046 patients in the cohort, 9553 (13.4%) experienced the primary outcome of complications or death, including 1875 of 16,107 patients (11.6%) with 0 high-risk services, 3788 of 28,085 patients (13.5%) with 1 high-risk service, and 3890 of 26,854 patients (14.5%) with 2+ highrisk services (P < 0.001). In logistic regression models adjusting for relevant patient, injury, and site characteristics, patients who received care from 1 or more high-risk services were at 24.1% (95% confidence interval 17.2% to 31.3%; P < 0.001) greater risk of experiencing the primary study outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Trauma patients who received care from at least 1 service with a high proportion of physicians modeling unprofessional behavior were at an increased risk of death or complications.

Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission-Part I: How Tiered Professionalism Interventions Support Teamwork and Prevent Adverse Events.

At the foundation of clinical medicine is the relationship among patients, families, and health care professionals. Implicit to that social contract, professionals pledge to bring clinical excellence to advance their patients' wellness and healing-and to prevent harm. Patients trust that those privileged to deliver care will do so unwaveringly in service of patients' best interests; however, the incentives and infrastructure surrounding health care delivery can promote or undermine individual performance, teamwork, and patient safety. Modeling professionalism and identifying slips and lapses supports pursuit of high reliability. Part 1, Promoting Professionalism, introduces the first of 3 pillars of advancing the clinical mission.

Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission-Part II: How Communication and Resolution Programs Promote Patient Safety and Trust.

When patients are harmed by health care, concerns fan out in all directions. Patients and families confront a sea of uncertainty, contending with injuries that drain them physically, emotionally, and financially. Health care professionals experience a powerful mix of emotions, but are seldom afforded the time to process what happened or the resources to relieve suffering and prevent harm. Honesty, transparency, and empathy are indispensable to a comprehensive approach that prioritizes patient and family-centered response to unintended harm, clinical improvement, and redemptive peer review. Part 2 introduces the second of three pillars for advancing the clinical mission: communication and transparency.

Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission-Part III: How Leaders Can Prevent Burnout, Foster Wellness and Recovery, and Instill Resilience.

The hidden epidemic of burnout exacts a staggering toll on professionals and patients, reflected in increased risk of medical errors, complications, and staff turnover. For surgeons, nurses, and other team members working at the sharp end of care, adverse events can amplify work exhaustion, interpersonal disengagement, and risk of moral adversity. Visionary leaders are not content to mitigate burnout and moral injury; they elevate the human experience throughout health care by modeling wellness, fostering moral courage, promoting safety of professionals, and restoring joy in work. Part 3, Health Professional Wellness and Resilience, introduces the final pillar for advancing the clinical mission.

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.

Evaluation of the My Diabetes Care Patient Portal Intervention: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a multi-faceted intervention embedded within an established patient portal, My Health at Vanderbilt. MDC is designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-care. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, provides literacy-level appropriate educational resources, and links to a diabetes online patient support community and diabetes news feeds. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effects of MDC on patient activation in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Moreover, we plan to assess secondary outcomes, including system use and usability, and the effects of MDC on cognitive and behavioral outcomes (eg, self-care and self-efficacy). METHODS: We are conducting a 6-month, 2-arm, parallel-design, pragmatic pilot randomized controlled trial of the effect of MDC on patient activation. Adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are recruited from primary care clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants are eligible for the study if they are currently being treated with at least one diabetes medication, are able to speak and read in English, are 21 years or older, and have an existing My Health at Vanderbilt account and reliable access to a desktop or laptop computer with internet access. We exclude patients living in long-term care facilities, patients with known cognitive deficits or severe visual impairment, and patients currently participating in any other diabetes-related research study. Participants are randomly assigned to MDC or usual care. We collect self-reported survey data, including the Patient Activation Measure (R) at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. We will use mixed-effects regression models to estimate potentially time-varying intervention effects while adjusting for the baseline measure of the outcome. The mixed-effects model will use fixed effects for patient-level characteristics and random effects for health care provider variables (eg, primary care physicians). RESULTS: This study is ongoing. Recruitment was closed in May 2020; 270 patients were randomized. Of those randomized, most (214/267, 80.1%) were non-Hispanic White, and 13.1% (35/267) were non-Hispanic Black, 43.7% (118/270) reported being 65 years or older, and 33.6% (90/268) reported limited health literacy. We obtained at least 95.6% (258/270) completion among participants through the 3-month follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial will be one of the first to evaluate a patient-facing diabetes digital health intervention delivered via a patient portal. By embedding MDC into Epic's MyChart platform with more than 127 million patient records, our intervention is directly integrated into routine care, highly scalable, and sustainable. Our findings and evolving patient portal functionality will inform the continued development of MDC to best meet users' needs and a larger trial focused on the impact of MDC on clinical end points. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03947333; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03947333. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25955.

Whose Responsibility Is It to Address Bullying in Health Care?

Bullying has significant, far-reaching consequences for all health professionals, students, trainees, patients, their families, and organizations. Bullying is antithetical to healthy organizational culture, patient safety, and professionalism. A culture of safety and respect in sites of health care education and work is foundational to the well-being of everyone in health care. This commentary on a case recommends individual and collective responses to bullying that express fundamental clinical and ethical values and what it means to be a professional.

Qualitative Content Analysis of Coworkers' Safety Reports of Unprofessional Behavior by Physicians and Advanced Practice Professionals.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to develop a valid and reliable taxonomy of coworker reports of alleged unprofessional behavior by physicians and advanced practice professionals and determine the prevalence of reports describing particular types of unprofessional conduct. METHODS: We conducted qualitative content analysis of coworker reports of alleged unprofessional behavior by physicians and advanced practice professionals to create a standardized taxonomy. We conducted a focus group of experts in medical professionalism to assess the taxonomy's face validity. We randomly selected 120 reports (20%) of the 590 total reports submitted through the medical center's safety event reporting system between June 2015 and September 2016 to measure interrater reliability of taxonomy codes and estimate the prevalence of reports describing particular types of conduct. RESULTS: The initial taxonomy contained 22 codes organized into the following four domains: competent medical care, clear and respectful communication, integrity, and responsibility. All 10 experts agreed that the four domains reflected essential elements of medical professionalism. Interrater reliabilities for all codes and domains had a κ value greater than the 0.60 threshold for good reliability. Most reports (60%, 95% confidence interval = 51%-69%) described disrespectful or offensive communication. Nine codes had a prevalence of less than 1% and were folded into their respective domains resulting in a final taxonomy composed of 13 codes. CONCLUSIONS: The final taxonomy represents a useful tool with demonstrated validity and reliability, opening the door for reliable analysis and systems to promote accountability and behavior change. Given the safety implications of unprofessional behavior, understanding the typology of coworker observations of unprofessional behavior may inform organization strategies to address this threat to patient safety.

Characteristics of Inpatient Units Associated With Sustained Hand Hygiene Compliance.

OBJECTIVES: Following institution of a hand hygiene (HH) program at an academic medical center, HH compliance increased from 58% to 92% for 3 years. Some inpatient units modeled early, sustained increases, and others exhibited protracted improvement rates. We examined the association between patterns of HH compliance improvement and unit characteristics. METHODS: Adult inpatient units (N = 35) were categorized into the following three tiers based on their pattern of HH compliance: early adopters, nonsustained and late adopters, and laggards. Unit-based culture measures were collected, including nursing practice environment scores (National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators [NDNQI]), patient rated quality and teamwork (Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems), patient complaint rates, case mix index, staff turnover rates, and patient volume. Associations between variables and the binary outcome of laggard (n = 18) versus nonlaggard (n = 17) were tested using a Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariate analysis was performed using an ordinal regression model. RESULTS: In direct comparison, laggard units had clinically relevant differences in NDNQI scores, Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems scores, case mix index, patient complaints, patient volume, and staff turnover. The results were not statistically significant. In the multivariate model, the predictor variables explained a significant proportion of the variability associated with laggard status, (R2 = 0.35, P = 0.0481) and identified NDNQI scores and patient complaints as statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of an HH program was associated with factors related to a unit's safety culture. In particular, NDNQI scores and patient complaint rates might be used to assist in identifying units that may require additional attention during implementation of an HH quality improvement program.

Expanding mandatory healthcare personnel immunization beyond influenza: Impact of a broad immunization program with enhanced accountability.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of a mandatory immunization program to increase and sustain high immunization coverage for healthcare personnel (HCP). DESIGN: Descriptive study with before-and-after analysis. SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Medical center HCP. METHODS: A comprehensive mandatory immunization initiative was implemented in 2 phases, starting in July 2014. Key facets of the initiative included a formalized exemption review process, incorporation into institutional quality goals, data feedback, and accountability to support compliance. RESULTS: Both immunization and overall compliance rates with targeted immunizations increased significantly in the years after the implementation period. The influenza immunization rate increased from 80% the year prior to the initiative to >97% for the 3 subsequent influenza seasons (P < .0001). Mumps, measles and varicella vaccination compliance increased from 94% in January 2014 to >99% by January 2017, rubella vaccination compliance increased from 93% to 99.5%, and hepatitis B vaccination compliance from 95% to 99% (P < .0001 for all comparisons). An associated positive effect on TB testing compliance, which was not included in the mandatory program, was also noted; it increased from 76% to 92% over the same period (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Thoughtful, step-wise implementation of a mandatory immunization program linked to professional accountability can be successful in increasing immunization rates as well as overall compliance with policy requirements to cover all recommended HCP immunizations.

Association of Occupational Distress and Sleep-Related Impairment in Physicians With Unsolicited Patient Complaints.

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between occupational distress and sleep-related impairment in physicians and unsolicited patient complaints. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We used deidentified data from an academic medical center's physician survey administered in April and May of 2013 to perform a retrospective cohort study. Third-party stewards of the identifiable information regarding unsolicited patient complaints from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2016, matched these data with corresponding physicians' occupational distress data. Unsolicited patient complaints were used to calculate the Patient Advocacy Reporting System (PARS) score, a validated predictor of malpractice litigation risk and clinical outcomes. Physicians were grouped into 1 of 3 PARS risk categories based on previously defined thresholds: low risk (score of 0), intermediate risk (score of 1-12), or high risk (score ≥13). RESULTS: Each 1-point increase in burnout and sleep-related impairment, on a 5-point scale, was associated with a 69% (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.12-2.54) and 49% (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.08-2.05) increased odds of being in the next higher PARS risk category, respectively, averaged across all 4 years. Professional fulfillment was a protective factor, associated with fewer unsolicited patient complaints. Each 1-point decrease in professional fulfillment was associated with a 68% (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.16-2.44) increased odds of being in the next higher PARS risk category. The effect of depression on PARS risk category was not significant (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.84-2.10). CONCLUSION: Findings from this research suggest that occupational distress and sleep-related impairment in physicians are associated with unsolicited patient complaints.

Developing an Implementation Strategy for Systematic Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes at an Academic Health Center.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used in research and have the potential to improve clinical care. We sought to develop a strategy for integrating PROMs into routine clinical care at an academic health center. The implementation strategy consisted of three phases. The first, exploratory phase, focused on engaging leadership and conducting an inventory of current efforts to collect PROMs. The inventory revealed 87 patient-reported outcome efforts, 47 of which used validated PROMs (62% for research, 21% for clinical care, 17% for quality). In the second, preparatory phase, we identified three pilot implementation sites chosen with facilitators determined in the exploratory phase. Using data from local needs assessments at the pilot sites, we constructed a timeline for inclusion of PROM efforts across the clinical enterprise. In the third phase, we adapted a technology platform for capturing PROMs using the electronic health record and began implementing this platform at the pilot sites. We found that integrating PROMs into routine clinical practice is highly complex. This complexity necessitates change management at the enterprise level.

Association of Coworker Reports About Unprofessional Behavior by Surgeons With Surgical Complications in Their Patients.

Importance: For surgical teams, high reliability and optimal performance depend on effective communication, mutual respect, and continuous situational awareness. Surgeons who model unprofessional behaviors may undermine a culture of safety, threaten teamwork, and thereby increase the risk for medical errors and surgical complications. Objective: To test the hypothesis that patients of surgeons with higher numbers of reports from coworkers about unprofessional behaviors are at greater risk for postoperative complications than patients whose surgeons generate fewer coworker reports. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study assessed data from 2 geographically diverse academic medical centers that participated in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and recorded and acted on electronic reports of safety events from coworkers describing unprofessional behavior by surgeons. Patients included in the NSQIP database who underwent inpatient or outpatient operations at 1 of the 2 participating sites from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2016, were eligible. Patients were excluded if they were younger than 18 years on the date of the operation or if the attending surgeon had less than 36 months of monitoring for coworker reports preceding the date of the operation. Data were analyzed from August 8, 2018, through April 9, 2019. Exposures: Coworker reports about unprofessional behavior by the surgeon in the 36 months preceding the date of the operation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postoperative surgical or medical complications, as defined by the NSQIP, within 30 days of the operation. Results: Among 13 653 patients in the cohort (54.0% [7368 ] female; mean [SD] age, 57 [16] years) who underwent operations performed by 202 surgeons (70.8% [143] male), 1583 (11.6%) experienced a complication, including 825 surgical (6.0%) and 1070 medical (7.8%) complications. Patients whose surgeons had more coworker reports were significantly more likely to experience any complication (0 reports, 954 of 8916 [10.7%]; ≥4 reports, 294 of 2087 [14.1%]; P < .001), any surgical complication (0 reports, 516 of 8916 [5.8%]; ≥4 reports, 159 of 2087 [7.6%]; P < .01), or any medical complication (0 reports, 634 of 8916 [7.1%]; ≥4 reports, 196 of 2087 [9.4%]; P < .001). The adjusted complication rate was 14.3% higher for patients whose surgeons had 1 to 3 reports and 11.9% higher for patients whose surgeons had 4 or more reports compared with patients whose surgeons had no coworker reports (P = .05). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients whose surgeons had higher numbers of coworker reports about unprofessional behavior in the 36 months before the patient's operation appeared to be at increased risk of surgical and medical complications. These findings suggest that organizations interested in ensuring optimal patient outcomes should focus on addressing surgeons whose behavior toward other medical professionals may increase patients' risk for adverse outcomes.

Cognitive Skills Assessment for the Aging Orthopaedic Surgeon: AOA Critical Issues.

Physician leaders are increasingly confronted with the challenge of evaluating the performance of surgical colleagues during the last phase of their careers. Identification of physicians with declining cognitive and clinical skills must be balanced against awareness of laws protecting colleagues from discrimination. Responding successfully to this challenge requires appropriate policies, reliable data, standardized evaluation tools, consistent documentation, and the development of compassionate and effective solutions that avoid discriminatory practices. Surgical champions are essential for promoting self-regulation. Performance evaluations should comply with medical staff bylaws and institutional wellness policies.

A Patient-Facing Diabetes Dashboard Embedded in a Patient Web Portal: Design Sprint and Usability Testing.

BACKGROUND: Health apps and Web-based interventions designed for patients with diabetes offer novel and scalable approaches to engage patients and improve outcomes. However, careful attention to the design and usability of these apps and Web-based interventions is essential to reduce the barriers to engagement and maximize use. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to apply design sprint methodology paired with mixed-methods, task-based usability testing to design and evaluate an innovative, patient-facing diabetes dashboard embedded in an existing patient portal and integrated into an electronic health record. METHODS: We applied a 5-day design sprint methodology developed by Google Ventures (Alphabet Inc, Mountain View, CA) to create our initial dashboard prototype. We identified recommended strategies from the literature for using patient-facing technologies to enhance patient activation and designed a dashboard functionality to match each strategy. We then conducted a mixed-methods, task-based usability assessment of dashboard prototypes with individual patients. Measures included validated metrics of task performance on 5 common and standardized tasks, semistructured interviews, and a validated usability satisfaction questionnaire. After each round of usability testing, we revised the dashboard prototype in response to usability findings before the next round of testing until the majority of participants successfully completed tasks, expressed high satisfaction, and identified no new usability concerns (ie, stop criterion was met). RESULTS: The sample (N=14) comprised 5 patients in round 1, 3 patients in round 2, and 6 patients in round 3, at which point we reached our stop criterion. The participants' mean age was 63 years (range 45-78 years), 57% (8/14) were female, and 50% (7/14) were white. Our design sprint yielded an initial patient-facing diabetes dashboard prototype that displayed and summarized 5 measures of patients' diabetes health status (eg, hemoglobin A1c). The dashboard used graphics to visualize and summarize health data and reinforce understanding, incorporated motivational strategies (eg, social comparisons and gamification), and provided educational resources and secure-messaging capability. More than 80% of participants were able to successfully complete all 5 tasks using the final prototype. Interviews revealed usability concerns with design, the efficiency of use, and content and terminology, which led to improvements. Overall satisfaction (0=worst and 7=best) improved from the initial to the final prototype (mean 5.8, SD 0.4 vs mean 6.7, SD 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the utility of the design sprint methodology paired with mixed-methods, task-based usability testing to efficiently and effectively design a patient-facing, Web-based diabetes dashboard that is satisfying for patients to use.