Self-scheduling in a Large Multispecialty and Multisite Clinic: A Retrospective, Longitudinal Examination of Multiple Self-Scheduled Visit Types.

Background: Self-scheduling of medical visits is becoming available at many medical institutions. We aimed to examine the self-scheduled visit counts and rate of growth of self-scheduled visits in a multispecialty practice. Methods: For 85 weeks extending from January 1, 2022 through August 24, 2023, we examined self-scheduled visit counts for over 1500 self-scheduled visit types. We compared completed self-scheduled visit counts to all scheduled completed visit counts for the same visit types. We collected counts of the most frequently self-scheduled visit types for each week and examined the change over time. We also determined the proportion that each visit type was self-scheduled. Results: There were 20,769 699 completed visits during the course of the study that met the criteria for inclusion. Self-scheduled visits accounted for 4.0% of all completed visits (838 592/20,769 699). Over the 85-week span, self-scheduled visits rose from 3.0% to 5.3% of the total. There were 1887 unique visit types that were associated with completed visits. There were just 6 appointment visit types of the total 1887 self-scheduled visit types that accounted for 50.7% of the total 838 592 self-scheduled visits. Those 6 visit types were a lab blood test visit (19.5%, 163 K visits), two Family Medicine office visit types (13.0%, 109 K visits), a screening mammogram visit type (6.6%, 55 K visits), a scheduled express care visit type (6%, 50 K visits) and a COVID immunization visit type (5.7%, 48 K visits). Twenty-one visit types that were self-scheduled accounted for 75% of the total self-scheduled visits. Four seasonal visits, accounting for 10.6% of the total self-scheduled visits, were responsible for almost all the non-linear change in self-scheduling. Conclusion: Self-scheduling accounted for a small but growing percent of all outpatient scheduled visits in a multispecialty, multisite practice. A wide range of visit types can be successfully self-scheduled.

Self-scheduling Medical Visits in a Multispecialty, Multisite Medical Practice: Complexity, Challenges, and Successes.

Background: Self-scheduling of medical visits is becoming more common but the complexity of applying multiple requirements for self-scheduling has hampered implementation. Mayo Clinic implemented self-scheduling in 2019 and has been increasing its portfolio of self-schedulable visits since then. Our aim was to show measures quantifying the complexity associated with medical visit scheduling and to describe how opportunities and challenges of scheduling complexity apply in self-scheduling. Methods: We examined scheduled visits from January 1, 2022, through August 24, 2023. For seven visit categories, we counted all unique visit types that were scheduled, for both staff-scheduled and self-scheduled. We examined counts of self-scheduled visit types to identify those with highest uptake during the study period. Results: There were 9555 unique visit types associated with 20.8 M (million) completed visits. Self-scheduled visit types accounted for 4.0% (838,592/20,769,699) of the completed total visits. Of seven visit categories, self-scheduled established patient visits, testing visits, and procedure visits accounted for 93.5% (784,375/838,592) of all self-scheduled visits. Established patient visits in primary care (10 visit types) accounted for 273,007 (32.6%) of all self-scheduled visits. Testing visits (blood and urine testing, 2 visit types) accounted for 183,870 (21.9%) of all self-scheduled visits. Procedure visits for screening mammograms, bone mineral density, and immunizations (8 visit types) accounted for 147,358 (17.6%) of all self-scheduled visits. Conclusion: Large numbers of unique visit types comprise a major challenge for self-scheduling. Some visit types are more suitable for self-scheduling. Guideline-based procedure visits such as screening mammograms, bone mineral density exams, and immunizations are examples of visits that have high volumes and can be standardized for self-scheduling. Established patient visits and laboratory testing visits also can be standardized for self-scheduling. Despite the successes, there remain thousands of specific visit types that may need some staff-scheduler intervention to properly schedule.

Recommendation endpoints and safety of an online self-triage for depression symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: Online symptom checkers are a way to address patient concerns and potentially offload a burdened healthcare system. However, safety outcomes of self-triage are unknown, so we reviewed triage recommendations and outcomes of our institution's depression symptom checker. METHODS: We examined endpoint recommendations and follow-up encounters seven days afterward during 2 December 2021 to 13 December 2022. Patients with an emergency department visit or hospitalization within seven days of self-triaging had a manual review of the electronic health record to determine if the visit was related to depression, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempt. Charts were reviewed for deaths within seven days of self-triage. RESULTS: There were 287 unique encounters from 263 unique patients. In 86.1% (247/287), the endpoint was an instruction to call nurse triage; in 3.1% of encounters (9/287), instruction was to seek emergency care. Only 20.2% (58/287) followed the recommendations given. Of the 229 patients that did not follow the endpoint recommendations, 121 (52.8%) had some type of follow-up within seven days. Nearly 11% (31/287) were triaged to endpoints not requiring urgent contact and 9.1% (26/287) to an endpoint that would not need any healthcare team input. No patients died in the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients did not follow the recommendations for follow-up care although ultimately most patients did receive care within seven days. Self-triage appears to appropriately sort patients with depressed mood to emergency care. On-line self-triaging tools for depression have the potential to safely offload some work from clinic personnel.

Hospitalization Risk Associated With Emergency Department Reasons for Visit and Patient Age: A Retrospective Evaluation of National Emergency Department Survey Data to Help Identify Potentially Avoidable Emergency Department Visits.

Background: Patients often present to emergency departments (EDs) with concerns that do not require emergency care. Self-triage and other interventions may help some patients decide whether they should be seen in the ED. Symptoms associated with low risk of hospitalization can be identified in national ED data and can inform the design of interventions to reduce avoidable ED visits. Methods: We used the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) data from the United States National Health Care Statistics (NHCS) division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The ED datasets from 2011 through 2020 were combined. Primary reasons for ED visit and the binary field for hospital admission from the ED were used to estimate the proportion of ED patients admitted to the hospital for each reason for visit and age category. Results: There were 221,027 surveyed ED visits during the 10-year data collection with 736 different primary reasons for visit and 23,228 hospitalizations. There were 145 million estimated hospitalizations from 1.37 billion estimated ED visits (10.6%). Inclusion criteria for this study were reasons for visit which had at least 30 ED visits in the sample; there were 396 separate reasons for visit which met this criteria. Of these 396 reasons for visit, 97 had admission percentages less than 2% and another 52 had hospital admissions estimated between 2% and 4%. However, there was a significant increase in hospitalizations within many of the ED reasons for visit in older adults. Conclusion: Reasons for visit from national ED data can be ranked by hospitalization risk. Low-risk symptoms may help healthcare institutions identify potentially avoidable ED visits. Healthcare systems can use this information to help manage potentially avoidable ED visits with interventions designed to apply to their patient population and healthcare access.

Online Self-Triage of Ear or Hearing Concerns in a Patient Portal: Comparison of Subsequent Diagnoses and Hospitalizations to National Emergency Department and National Ambulatory Ear or Hearing Visits.

Background: Although online self-triage is easily accessible, little is known about the patients who use self-triage or their subsequent diagnoses. We compared ear/hearing self-triage subsequent diagnoses to ear/hearing visit diagnoses in emergency departments (ED) and ambulatory clinics across the United States. Methods: We compared International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD10) coded diagnoses following online self-triage for ear/hearing concerns with those from national ED and ambulatory clinic samples. We used data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) and National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) for comparison. Using matched ear/hearing diagnostic categories for those aged 1 and over, we compared self-triage diagnosis frequencies with national ED and ambulatory diagnosis frequencies. Results: Following ear/hearing self-triage, there were 1092 subsequent office visits with a primary diagnosis code. For five frequently diagnosed ear/hearing conditions (i.e., suppurative and nonsuppurative otitis media [OM], otalgia, otitis externa, and cerumen impaction), there was a strong correlation between diagnosis counts made following self-triage and estimated counts of national ED visit diagnoses (r = 0.94; CI 95% [0.37 to 0.99]; p = .016, adjusted r2 = 0.85). Seven diagnoses were available to compare with the national ambulatory sample; correlation was r = 0.79; CI 95% [0.08 to 0.97]; p = .037, adjusted r2 = 0.54. For ages 1 and over, estimated hospital admissions from the national ED visits for ear/hearing were 0.76%, CI 95% [0.28-2.1%]; estimated total national ear/hearing ED visits were 7.5 million (for 4 years, 2016 through 2019). Conclusion: The strong correlation of ear-related self-triage diagnoses with national ED diagnoses and the low hospitalization risk for these diagnoses suggests that there is an opportunity for self-triage of ear/hearing concerns to decrease ED visits for these symptoms.

Self-Triage Use, Subsequent Healthcare Utilization, and Diagnoses: A Retrospective Study of Process and Clinical Outcomes Following Self-Triage and Self-Scheduling for Ear or Hearing Symptoms.

Background: Self-triage is becoming more widespread, but little is known about the people who are using online self-triage tools and their outcomes. For self-triage researchers, there are significant barriers to capturing subsequent healthcare outcomes. Our integrated healthcare system was able to capture subsequent healthcare utilization of individuals who used self-triage integrated with self-scheduling of provider visits. Methods: We retrospectively examined healthcare utilization and diagnoses after patients had used self-triage and self-scheduling for ear or hearing symptoms. Outcomes and counts of office visits, telemedicine interactions, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations were captured. Diagnosis codes associated with subsequent provider visits were dichotomously categorized as being associated with ear or hearing concerns or not. Nonvisit care encounters of patient-initiated messages, nurse triage calls, and clinical communications were also captured. Results: For 2168 self-triage uses, we were able to capture subsequent healthcare encounters within 7 days of the self-triage for 80.5% (1745/2168). In subsequent 1092 office visits with diagnoses, 83.1% (891/1092) of the uses were associated with relevant ear, nose and throat diagnoses. Only 0.24% (4/1662) of patients with captured outcomes were associated with a hospitalization within 7 days. Self-triage resulted in a self-scheduled office visit in 7.2% (126/1745). Office visits resulting from a self-scheduled visit had significantly fewer combined non-visit care encounters per office visit (fewer combined nurse triage calls, patient messages, and clinical communication messages) than office visits that were not self-scheduled (-0.51; 95% CI, -0.72 to -0.29; P < .0001). Conclusion: In an appropriate healthcare setting, self-triage outcomes can be captured in a high percentage of uses to examine for safety, patient adherence to recommendations, and efficiency of self-triage. With the ear or hearing self-triage, most uses had subsequent visit diagnoses relevant to ear or hearing, so most patients appeared to be selecting the appropriate self-triage pathway for their symptoms.

McIsaac score for group A streptococcal infection: Comparison of electronic visits versus face-to-face visits.

INTRODUCTION: Acute sore throat is a common complaint traditionally completed with an in-person visit. However, non-face-to-face telemedicine visits offer greater access at reduced cost. We evaluated patient/caregiver asynchronous text-based electronic visits (eVisits) for acute sore throat and whether there was concordance for individual components and total McIsaac score compared to a clinician's assessment. eVisits were completed by patients and/or their caregivers via a secure patient portal. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we manually reviewed charts between February 2017 and July 2019 of patients who had an eVisit, in-person visit and group A streptococcal (GAS) test performed on the same day for an acute sore throat. We calculated a McIsaac score for eVisits and in-person visits, and compared each component and total score using Cohen's kappa agreement statistic. RESULTS: There were 320 instances of patients who had an eVisit, in-person visit and GAS testing done on the same day. Approximately a third of eVisits were missing at least one McIsaac component, with the physical examination elements missing most commonly. Individual score congruence was moderate for cough (0.41), fair for fever (0.34) and slight for tonsillar swelling/exudate and lymphadenopathy (0.17 and 0.08, respectively), with total congruence being slight to fair (0.09-0.37). A McIsaac score of ≤1 showed moderate agreement (0.44). Visits with complete individual score components demonstrated improved congruence: substantial for cough (0.64), moderate for fever (0.57), fair for tonsillar swelling (0.3) and slight for lymphadenopathy (0.13). DISCUSSION: Overall agreement for individual score components was better for symptoms than it was for examination components, and was improved when data were complete. A McIsaac score of 1 or 0 had moderate agreement and thus could reasonably be safely used to exclude patients from GAS testing.

Comparison of Virtual Management of Vulvovaginal Candidiasis to Traditional In-Person Care.

Objective: Compare demographics, treatment, and follow-up rates for patients with complaints of vulvovaginitis suggestive of candida infection evaluated via e-visit, face-to-face (F2F) visits, or nurse-administered phone protocol. Methods: Manual review of 150 vaginitis visits of each visit type (e-visit, F2F, and phone protocol) completed between May 5, 2018 through January 31, 2020 by Mayo Clinic patients residing in Minnesota. Outcomes: Comparison between the three visit types of patient characteristics, treatment rates, type of treatment, follow-up rates, and types of follow-up. Results: Patients utilizing phone visits were significantly older than those seeking care via e-visit (p < 0.0001) or F2F (p = 0.001) and were more likely to be treated with oral fluconazole than those treated by e-visit (p < 0.0001) or F2F (p < 0.0001) encounters. Patients were significantly less likely to receive fungal directed treatment at a F2F visit than an e-visit (p < 0.0001) or phone encounter (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in follow-up rates between the three groups. Conclusion: Virtual visits (non-F2F) for suspected vulvovaginal candidiasis are unlikely to result in more follow-up visits than F2F encounters; however, prescriptions for antifungals are significantly higher with virtual visits.

Association of Early and Late Hospital Readmissions with a Novel Housing-Based Socioeconomic Measure.

Background: While socioeconomic status has been linked to hospital readmissions for several conditions, reliable measures of individual socioeconomic status are often not available. HOUSES, a new measure of individual socioeconomic status based upon objective public data about one's housing unit, is inversely associated with overall hospitalization rate but it has not been studied with respect to readmissions. Purpose: To determine if patients in the lowest HOUSES quartile are more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (short-term) and 180 days (long-term). Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 11 993 patients having 21 633 admissions was conducted using generalized linear mixed-effects models. Results: HOUSES quartile did not show any significant association with early readmission. However, when compared to the lowest HOUSES quartile, the second quartile (OR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.83-0.98) and the third quartile (OR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.83-0.99) were associated with lower odds of late readmission while the highest quartile (OR = 0.91, 95%CI 0.82-1.01) was not statistically different. Conclusion: HOUSES was associated with late readmission, but not early readmission. This may be because early readmissions are influenced by medical conditions and hospital care while late readmissions are influenced by ambulatory care and home-based factors. Since HOUSES relies on public county assessor data, it is generally available and may be used to focus interventions on those at highest risk for late readmission.

Portal Message Language Use Prior to Suicide, Suicide Attempts, and Hospitalization for Depression.

Introduction: Previous research suggests patients may be willing to communicate serious psychiatric concerns through patient portals. Methods: Retrospective chart review of portal messages sent by patients who had an emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization for depression, self-harm, or suicidality or had a completed suicide (cases) was reviewed for content that was suggestive of depression or self-harm and language indicating emotional distress. Comparison with a randomly selected group (controls) was performed. Results: During the study period 420 messages were sent by 149 patients within 30 days of death by suicide, ED visit, and/or hospitalization related to depression, suicidality, or suicide attempt. Thirteen patients died by suicide but only 23% (3 of 13) sent one or more portal messages within 30 days before their death. None mentioned thoughts of self-harm. There were 271 messages sent by patients who were hospitalized, 142 messages by those who presented to the ED, and 56 messages patients who attempted suicide. Patient messages from cases were more likely than messages from controls to convey a depressed mood (17.1% vs. 3.1%, odds ratio 6.5; 95% confidence interval 3.6-11.9, p < 0.0001), thoughts of suicide or self-harm (4.8% vs. 0% p < 0.0001), or have a distressed tone (24.0% vs. 1.7%, odds ratio 18.7; 95% confidence interval 8.6-41, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Patient portal messages from patients with subsequent hospitalizations for depression and suicidality do report thoughts of depression, distress, and thoughts of self-harm. However, portal use before completed suicide was not helpful at identifying at-risk patients although total numbers were small.

Use of the McIsaac Score to Predict Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis in Outpatient Nurse Phone Triage and Electronic Visits Compared With In-Person Visits: Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The McIsaac criteria are a validated scoring system used to determine the likelihood of an acute sore throat being caused by group A streptococcus (GAS) to stratify patients who need strep testing. OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare McIsaac criteria obtained during face-to-face (f2f) and non-f2f encounters. METHODS: This retrospective study compared the percentage of positive GAS tests by McIsaac score for scores calculated during nurse protocol phone encounters, e-visits (electronic visits), and in person f2f clinic visits. RESULTS: There was no difference in percentages of positive strep tests between encounter types for any of the McIsaac scores. There were significantly more phone and e-visit encounters with any missing score components compared with f2f visits. For individual score components, there were significantly fewer e-visits missing fever and cough information compared with phone encounters and f2f encounters. F2f encounters were significantly less likely to be missing descriptions of tonsils and lymphadenopathy compared with phone and e-visit encounters. McIsaac scores of 4 had positive GAS rates of 55% to 68% across encounter types. There were 4 encounters not missing any score components with a McIsaac score of 0. None of these 4 encounters had a positive GAS test. CONCLUSIONS: McIsaac scores of 4 collected during non-f2f care could be used to consider empiric treatment for GAS without testing if significant barriers to testing exist such as the COVID-19 pandemic or geographic barriers. Future studies should evaluate further whether non-f2f encounters with McIsaac scores of 0 can be safely excluded from GAS testing.

Patient Voice and Mission: Why Do Patients Choose Family Medicine and What Do They Value?

Known gaps exist between what patients value and institutions prioritize. We sought to incorporate patients' reasons for valuing family medicine into a new Mission and Vision statement by deploying brief surveys to a convenience sample of patients. We conducted descriptive quantitative analyses of demographics and inductive content analysis of written responses. Patients returned 92 (20%) of 450 questionnaires. Responders were 63% female, mean age of 47 years. Patients noted distinguishing features of family medicine were (1) continuity of care, (2) all-encompassing care, and (3) trusted referrals. Some patients reported not knowing there was a distinction between family medicine and other primary care.

Vitamin D Status and Severe COVID-19 Disease Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency may increase the risk of severe COVID-19 disease. OBJECTIVES: To determine if 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were associated with the clinical outcomes of days on oxygen, duration of hospitalization, ICU admission, need for assisted ventilation, or mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 92 patients admitted to the hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection between April 16, 2020 and October 17, 2020. Multivariable regression was performed to assess the independent relationship of 25(OH)D values on outcomes, adjusting for significant covariates and the hospitalization day the level was tested. RESULTS: About 15 patients (16.3%) had 25(OH)D levels <20 ng/mL. Only 1 patient (3.4%) who had documented vitamin D supplementation prior to admission had 25(OH)D <20 ng/mL. Serum 25(OH)D concentrations were not significantly associated with any of our primary outcomes of days on oxygen, duration of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for mechanical ventilation, or mortality in any of the adjusted multivariable models. Adjusting for the hospital day of 25(OH)D sampling did not alter the relationship of 25(OH)D with any outcomes. CONCLUSION: Vitamin D status was not related to any of the primary outcomes reflecting severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. However, our sample size may have lacked sufficient power to demonstrate a small effect of vitamin D status on these outcomes.

Management of Acute Sinusitis via e-Visit.

Background: Acute sinusitis is the most common diagnosis in online health care delivery and is the diagnosis most associated with antibiotic prescriptions in the outpatient setting. Few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of managing sinusitis through e-visit in terms of antibiotic prescribing and follow-up rates. Introduction: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether e-visits for the management of acute sinusitis have equivalent clinical outcomes for patients when compared with face-to-face (F2F) visits and nurse-administered phone protocols in terms of antibiotic prescriptions and follow-up rates. Materials and Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on empaneled primary care patients between the ages of 18 and 75 years who had a clinical encounter for acute sinusitis at Mayo Clinic Rochester through e-visit, retail health clinic, or phone protocol. Initial antibiotic prescribing rates and follow-up rates for each encounter type were compared. Results: Both e-visit and phone protocol sinusitis encounters were less likely to result in initial treatment with an antibiotic than an F2F visit (84/150 [56%] e-visit, 92/150 [61%] phone, 108/150 [72%]; p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in follow-up rate between e-visits and F2F (27/150 [18%] vs. 21/150 [14%]; p = 0.34), and e-visits had significantly fewer follow-up visits than phone protocol (27/150 [18%] vs. 53/150 [35%]; p < 0.001). Conclusions: e-Visits are an effective modality to care for patients with acute sinusitis, offering equivalent or lower treatment and follow-up rates than more traditional avenues such as F2F visit at a retail clinic and phone protocol.

Patient portal message characteristics and reported thoughts of self-harm and suicide: A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: As use of electronic portal communication with healthcare teams increases, processes that effectively recognize messages that contain critical information are needed. This study aims to evaluate whether certain language and other characteristics of patient portal messages are associated with expressions of self-harm and suicidal ideation. METHODS: Using patient portal messages sent between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2017, we searched for words and letter combinations 'suicid' (to identify words suicide and suicidal), 'depress' (for depression, depressed, depressing), 'harm himself' (or 'herself 'or 'myself'), 'hurt himself' ('herself' or 'myself'), 'kill', 'shoot', 'cutting', 'knife', 'gun', 'overdose', 'over dose' and 'jump'. RESULTS: Of 831,009 messages, 11,174 messages contained one or more search terms. We manually reviewed 7,736 messages for content expressing self-harm or suicidality. Of the reviewed messages, 3.2% indicated thoughts of self-harm or suicide and 2.2% of messages suggested active suicidality. Of those expressing any thoughts of self-harm or suicide, 13.4% mentioned a specific plan, 20% were passively suicidal. Messages indicating thoughts of self-harm and suicide were more common in patients who were unmarried, non-white and younger than 18 years. Factors significantly associated with thoughts of self-harm were messages addressed to psychiatry or containing the letter combinations 'suicide', 'die', 'depress' and 'harm/hurt my/her/himself'. DISCUSSION: Certain letter combinations and patient portal message characteristics may be associated with expressions of self-harm and suicide. These factors should be considered as we develop systems of effectively screening patient portal messages for critical clinical information.

A Retrospective Analysis of Provider-to-Patient Secure Messages: How Much Are They Increasing, Who Is Doing the Work, and Is the Work Happening After Hours?

BACKGROUND: Patient portal registration and the use of secure messaging are increasing. However, little is known about how the work of responding to and initiating patient messages is distributed among care team members and how these messages may affect work after hours. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the growth of secure messages and determine how the work of provider responses to patient-initiated secure messages and provider-initiated secure messages is distributed across care teams and across work and after-work hours. METHODS: We collected secure messages sent from providers from January 1, 2013, to March 15, 2018, at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, both in response to patient secure messages and provider-initiated secure messages. We examined counts of messages over time, how the work of responding to messages and initiating messages was distributed among health care workers, messages sent per provider, messages per unique patient, and when the work was completed (proportion of messages sent after standard work hours). RESULTS: Portal registration for patients having clinic visits increased from 33% to 62%, and increasingly more patients and providers were engaged in messaging. Provider message responses to individual patients increased significantly in both primary care and specialty practices. Message responses per specialty physician provider increased from 15 responses per provider per year to 53 responses per provider per year from 2013 to 2018, resulting in a 253% increase. Primary care physician message responses increased from 153 per provider per year to 322 from 2013 to 2018, resulting in a 110% increase. Physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and registered nurses, all contributed to the substantial increases in the number of messages sent. CONCLUSIONS: Provider-sent secure messages at a large health care institution have increased substantially since implementation of secure messaging between patients and providers. The effort of responding to and initiating messages to patients was distributed across multiple provider categories. The percentage of message responses occurring after hours showed little substantial change over time compared with the overall increase in message volume.

Is a switch to a different electronic health record associated with a change in patient satisfaction?

OBJECTIVE: Financial impacts associated with a switch to a different electronic health record (EHR) have been documented. Less attention has been focused on the patient response to an EHR switch. The Mayo Clinic was involved in an EHR switch that occurred at 6 different locations and with 4 different "go-live" dates. We sought to understand the relationship between patient satisfaction and the transition to a new EHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used patient satisfaction data collected by Press Ganey from July 2016 through December 2019. Our patient satisfaction measure was the percent of patients responding "very good" (top box) to survey questions. Twenty-four survey questions were summarized by Press Ganey into 6 patient satisfaction domains. Piecewise linear regression was used to model patient satisfaction before and after the EHR switch dates. RESULTS: Significant drops in patient satisfaction were associated with the EHR switch. Patient satisfaction with access (ease of getting clinic on phone, ease of scheduling appointments, etc.) was most affected (range of 6 sites absolute decline: -3.4% to -8.8%; all significant at 99% confidence interval). Satisfaction with providers was least affected (range of 6 sites absolute decline: -0.5% to -2.8%; 4 of 6 sites significant at 99% confidence interval). After 9-15 months, patient satisfaction with access climbed back to pre-EHR switch levels. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction in several patient experience domains dropped significantly and stayed lower than pre-"go-live" for several months after a switch in EHR. Satisfaction with providers declined less than satisfaction with access.

Frequency of and Factors Associated with Care Partner Proxy Interaction with Health Care Teams Using Patient Portal Accounts.

Introduction: Proxies can communicate with health care teams through patient portals either by using proxy login credentials or a patient's login credentials. The frequency of proxies using patient login credentials is unknown. Methods: A random selection of 3,000 portal messages sent in through adult patients' own portal account was reviewed for indicators (referring to the patient in the third person) that someone other than the patient was using the patient portal account. Results: Of the reviewed 3,000 portal messages sent through patient portal accounts, 221 (7.4%) appeared to be sent in by a proxy, 2,512 (83.8%) appeared to have been sent in by the patient and for 266 (8.9%) portal messages reviewed it was unclear who sent in the message. There was no difference in mean age between patients who had proxy messages sent through patient portal accounts versus proxy portal accounts. Patients who had proxies send messages through patient accounts were more likely to be married and male. Out of 221 manually reviewed messages apparently sent by proxies through patient portal accounts there were 113 (51%) where the proxy included their name and 56 (25.3%) where they reported their relationship to the patient. During the study period, 0.7% of total messages on adult patients were sent through proxy accounts. Discussion: Proxies appear to use patient portal accounts much more frequently than proxy accounts to communicate with the health care team on adult patients; however, when using patient accounts they only identify themselves approximately half of the time.

Comparison of eVisit Management of Urinary Symptoms and Urinary Tract Infections with Standard Care.

Background: Urinary symptoms and urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common complaints for which women seek health care. Evolving modalities of care delivery have shifted management of these complaints from in-person face-to-face (F2F) visits, to nurse phone protocol management, and recently to online assessment via eVisit. While research has vetted the use of nurse phone protocol management, eVisit management outcomes have not been thoroughly studied. Purpose: To compare antibiotic prescribing, follow-up rates, and clinical outcomes between F2F visits at a retail clinic, nurse phone protocol encounters, and eVisits for the assessment and management of urinary symptoms and UTIs. Methods: A retrospective chart review of primary care empaneled patients at Mayo Clinic Rochester was conducted of females, 18 to 65 years old, who sought care for urinary symptoms via phone, eVisit, or F2F visit from August 1, 2016, through May 1, 2017. A total of 450 encounters, 150 from each of the 3 encounter types, were manually reviewed and compared for antibiotic prescribing rates, clinical outcomes, and 30-day follow-up rates. Results: Antibiotic prescribing rates for all three encounter types were similar. Referral for follow-up at initial encounter was more likely to be recommended from phone and eVisit encounters than F2F. No significant differences in follow-up rates or clinical outcomes were noted between the three encounter types. Conclusions: eVisits for urinary symptoms and UTI offer patients a convenient option for care without an increased use of antimicrobials, follow-up, or adverse clinical outcomes when compared with F2F visits or nurse-administered phone protocols.

Treating pediatric conjunctivitis without an exam: An evaluation of outcomes and antibiotic usage.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research paper is to compare antibiotic treatment, follow-up rates, and types of follow-up encounters among eVisits, phone calls, and in-person encounters for pediatric conjunctivitis. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients evaluated for conjunctivitis between May 1, 2016 and May 1, 2017, was performed. A total of 101 eVisits, 202 in-person retail clinic visits, and 202 nurse phone calls for conjunctivitis were manually reviewed for outcomes. Exclusion criteria included previous encounter for conjunctivitis in the past 14 days, treatment with an oral antibiotic at the initial encounter, or patient outside Minnesota at the time of encounter. Comparison among the three encounter types with regard to follow-up rates, follow-up encounter type within 14 days of initial evaluation, and prescribing rates was performed. RESULTS: Patients completing non-face-to-face encounters were significantly more likely to have follow-up care (34.6% and 45.5%) than those who had a face-to-face visit at the retail clinic (7.4%), p ≤ 0.0001. Patients initially evaluated by eVisit were more likely to have follow-up at the retail clinic while patients initially evaluated by phone call were more likely to have follow-up in their primary care office. Treatment rates with antibiotics were significantly higher in phone call encounters (41.6%) than in eVisits (25.7%) or face-to-face encounters (19.8%), p < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: Non-face-to-face visits have significantly higher rates of follow-up when compared to face-to-face encounters. Antibiotic prescribing is greater with phone call triage encounters; however, there was no significant difference in antibiotic prescribing rates between eVisits and face-to-face visits. Follow-up type varied according to site of initial encounter.