Testing Two Online Symptom Checkers With Vulnerable Groups: Usability Study to Improve Cognitive Accessibility of eHealth Services.

BACKGROUND: The popularity of eHealth services has surged significantly, underscoring the importance of ensuring their usability and accessibility for users with diverse needs, characteristics, and capabilities. These services can pose cognitive demands, especially for individuals who are unwell, fatigued, or experiencing distress. Additionally, numerous potentially vulnerable groups, including older adults, are susceptible to digital exclusion and may encounter cognitive limitations related to perception, attention, memory, and language comprehension. Regrettably, many studies overlook the preferences and needs of user groups likely to encounter challenges associated with these cognitive aspects. OBJECTIVE: This study primarily aims to gain a deeper understanding of cognitive accessibility in the practical context of eHealth services. Additionally, we aimed to identify the specific challenges that vulnerable groups encounter when using eHealth services and determine key considerations for testing these services with such groups. METHODS: As a case study of eHealth services, we conducted qualitative usability testing on 2 online symptom checkers used in Finnish public primary care. A total of 13 participants from 3 distinct groups participated in the study: older adults, individuals with mild intellectual disabilities, and nonnative Finnish speakers. The primary research methods used were the thinking-aloud method, questionnaires, and semistructured interviews. RESULTS: We found that potentially vulnerable groups encountered numerous issues with the tested services, with similar problems observed across all 3 groups. Specifically, clarity and the use of terminology posed significant challenges. The services overwhelmed users with excessive information and choices, while the terminology consisted of numerous complex medical terms that were difficult to understand. When conducting tests with vulnerable groups, it is crucial to carefully plan the sessions to avoid being overly lengthy, as these users often require more time to complete tasks. Additionally, testing with vulnerable groups proved to be quite efficient, with results likely to benefit a wider audience as well. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, it is evident that older adults, individuals with mild intellectual disability, and nonnative speakers may encounter cognitive challenges when using eHealth services, which can impede or slow down their use and make the services more difficult to navigate. In the worst-case scenario, these challenges may lead to errors in using the services. We recommend expanding the scope of testing to include a broader range of eHealth services with vulnerable groups, incorporating users with diverse characteristics and capabilities who are likely to encounter difficulties in cognitive accessibility.

Benchmarking usability of patient portals in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

INTRODUCTION: Poor usability is a barrier to widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHR). Providing good usability is especially challenging in the health care context, as there is a wide variety of patient users. Usability benchmarking is an approach for improving usability by evaluating and comparing the strength and weaknesses of systems. The main purpose of this study is to benchmark usability of patient portals across countries. METHODS: A mixed-methods survey approach was applied to benchmark the national patient portals offering patient access to EHR in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. These Nordic countries have similar public healthcare systems, and they are pioneers in offering patients access to EHR for several years. In a survey of 29,334 patients, both patients' quantitative ratings of usability and their qualitative descriptions of very positive and very negative peak experiences of portal use were collected. RESULTS: The usability scores ranged from good to fair level of usability. The narratives of very positive and very negative experiences included the benefits of the patient portals and experienced usability issues. The regression analysis of results showed that very positive and negative experiences of patient portal use explain 19-35% of the variation of usability scores in the four countries. The percentage of patients who reported very positive or very negative experiences in each country was unrelated to the usability scores across countries. CONCLUSIONS: The survey approach could be used to evaluate usability with a wide variety of users and it supported learning from comparison across the countries. The combination of quantitative and qualitative data provided an approximation of the level of the perceived usability, and identified usability issues to be improved and useful features that patients appreciate. Further work is needed to improve the comparability of the varied samples across countries.

Users' Experiences With Online Access to Electronic Health Records in Mental and Somatic Health Care: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) hold promise for empowering patients, but their impact may vary between mental and somatic health care. Medical professionals and ethicists have expressed concerns about the potential challenges of PAEHRs for patients, especially those receiving mental health care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate variations in the experiences of online access to electronic health records (EHRs) among persons receiving mental and somatic health care, as well as to understand how these experiences and perceptions vary among those receiving mental health care at different levels of point of care. METHODS: Using Norwegian data from the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey, we conducted a cross-sectional descriptive analysis of service use and perceptions of perceived mistakes, omissions, and offensive comments by mental and somatic health care respondents. Content analysis was used to analyze free-text responses to understand how respondents experienced the most serious errors in their EHR. RESULTS: Among 9505 survey participants, we identified 2008 mental health care respondents and 7086 somatic health care respondents. A higher percentage of mental health care respondents (1385/2008, 68.97%) reported that using PAEHR increased their trust in health care professionals compared with somatic health care respondents (4251/7086, 59.99%). However, a significantly larger proportion (P<.001) of mental health care respondents (976/2008, 48.61%) reported perceiving errors in their EHR compared with somatic health care respondents (1893/7086, 26.71%). Mental health care respondents also reported significantly higher odds (P<.001) of identifying omissions (758/2008, 37.75%) and offensive comments (729/2008, 36.3%) in their EHR compared with the somatic health care group (1867/7086, 26.35% and 826/7086, 11.66%, respectively). Mental health care respondents in hospital inpatient settings were more likely to identify errors (398/588, 67.7%; P<.001) and omissions (251/588, 42.7%; P<.001) than those in outpatient care (errors: 422/837, 50.4% and omissions: 336/837, 40.1%; P<.001) and primary care (errors: 32/100, 32% and omissions: 29/100, 29%; P<.001). Hospital inpatients also reported feeling more offended (344/588, 58.5%; P<.001) by certain content in their EHR compared with respondents in primary (21/100, 21%) and outpatient care (287/837, 34.3%) settings. Our qualitative findings showed that both mental and somatic health care respondents identified the most serious errors in their EHR in terms of medical history, communication, diagnosis, and medication. CONCLUSIONS: Most mental and somatic health care respondents showed a positive attitude toward PAEHRs. However, mental health care respondents, especially those with severe and chronic concerns, expressed a more critical attitude toward certain content in their EHR compared with somatic health care respondents. A PAEHR can provide valuable information and foster trust, but it requires careful attention to the use of clinical terminology to ensure accurate, nonjudgmental documentation, especially for persons belonging to health care groups with unique sensitivities.

The NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey: Cross-Sectional Study of National Patient Portal Users in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia.

BACKGROUND: Although many surveys have been conducted on patients accessing their own health records in recent years, there is a limited amount of nationwide cross-country data available on patients' views and preferences. To address this gap, an international survey of patient users was conducted in the Nordic eHealth project, NORDeHEALTH. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the sociodemographic characteristics and experiences of patients who accessed their electronic health records (EHRs) through national patient portals in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was distributed using the national online health portals. The target participants were patients who accessed the national patient portals at the start of 2022 and who were aged ≥15 years. The survey included a mixture of close-ended and free-text questions about participant sociodemographics, usability experience, experiences with health care and the EHR, reasons for reading health records online, experience with errors, omissions and offense, opinions about security and privacy, and the usefulness of portal functions. In this paper, we summarized the data on participant demographics, past experience with health care, and the patient portal through descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In total, 29,334 users completed the survey, of which 9503 (32.40%) were from Norway, 13,008 (44.35%) from Sweden, 4713 (16.07%) from Finland, and 2104 (7.17%) from Estonia. National samples were comparable according to reported gender, with about two-thirds identifying as women (19,904/29,302, 67.93%). Age distributions were similar across the countries, but Finland had older users while Estonia had younger users. The highest attained education and presence of health care education varied among the national samples. In all 4 countries, patients most commonly rated their health as "fair" (11,279/29,302, 38.48%). In Estonia, participants were more often inclined to rate their health positively, whereas Norway and Sweden had the highest proportion of negative health ratings. Across the whole sample, most patients received some care in the last 2 years (25,318/29,254, 86.55%). Mental health care was more common (6214/29,254, 21.24%) than oncological care (3664/29,254, 12.52%). Overall, most patients had accessed their health record "2 to 9 times" (11,546/29,306, 39.4%), with the most frequent users residing in Sweden, where about one-third of patients accessed it "more than 20 times" (4571/13,008, 35.14%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first large-scale international survey to compare patient users' sociodemographics and experiences with accessing their EHRs. Although the countries are in close geographic proximity and demonstrate similar advancements in giving their residents online records access, patient users in this survey differed. We will continue to investigate patients' experiences and opinions about national patient-accessible EHRs through focused analyses of the national and combined data sets from the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey.

Errors, Omissions, and Offenses in the Health Record of Mental Health Care Patients: Results from a Nationwide Survey in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Previous research reports that patients with mental health conditions experience benefits, for example, increased empowerment and validation, from reading their patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). In mental health care (MHC), PAEHRs remain controversial, as health care professionals are concerned that patients may feel worried or offended by the content of the notes. Moreover, existing research has focused on specific mental health diagnoses, excluding the larger PAEHR userbase with experience in MHC. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to establish if and how the experiences of patients with and those without MHC differ in using their PAEHRs by (1) comparing patient characteristics and differences in using the national patient portal between the 2 groups and (2) establishing group differences in the prevalence of negative experiences, for example, rates of errors, omissions, and offenses between the 2 groups. METHODS: Our analysis was performed on data from an online patient survey distributed through the Swedish national patient portal as part of our international research project, NORDeHEALTH. The respondents were patient users of the national patient portal 1177, aged 15 years or older, and categorized either as those with MHC experience or with any other health care experience (nonmental health care [non-MHC]). Patient characteristics such as gender, age, education, employment, and health status were gathered. Portal use characteristics included frequency of access, encouragement to read the record, and instances of positive and negative experiences. Negative experiences were further explored through rates of error, omission, and offense. The data were summarized through descriptive statistics. Group differences were analyzed through Pearson chi-square. RESULTS: Of the total sample (N=12,334), MHC respondents (n=3131) experienced errors (1586/3131, 50.65%, and non-MHC 3311/9203, 35.98%), omissions (1089/3131, 34.78%, and non-MHC 2427/9203, 26.37%) and offenses (1183/3131, 37.78%, and non-MHC 1616/9203, 17.56%) in the electronic health record at a higher rate than non-MHC respondents (n=9203). Respondents reported that the identified error (MHC 795/3131, 50.13%, and non-MHC 1366/9203, 41.26%) and omission (MHC 622/3131, 57.12%, and non-MHC 1329/9203, 54.76%) were "very important," but most did nothing to correct them (MHC 792/3131, 41.29%, and non-MHC 1838/9203, 42.17%). Most of the respondents identified as women in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: About 1 in 2 MHC patients identified an error in the record, and about 1 in 3 identified an omission, both at a much higher rate than in the non-MHC group. Patients with MHC also felt offended by the content of the notes more commonly (1 in 3 vs 1 in 6). These findings validate some of the worries expressed by health care professionals about providing patients with MHC with PAEHRs and highlight challenges with the documentation quality in the records.

Patients' Experiences of a National Patient Portal and Its Usability: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals not only provide patients with access to electronic health records (EHRs) and other digital health services, such as prescription renewals, but they can also improve patients' self-management, engagement with health care professionals (HCPs), and care processes. However, these benefits depend on patients' willingness to use patient portals and, ultimately, their experiences with the usefulness and ease of use of the portals. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the perceived usability of a national patient portal and the relationship of patients' very positive and very negative experiences with perceived usability. The study was aimed to be the first step in developing an approach for benchmarking the usability of patient portals in different countries. METHODS: Data were collected through a web-based survey of the My Kanta patient portal's logged-in patient users in Finland from January 24, 2022, to February 14, 2022. Respondents were asked to rate the usability of the patient portal, and the ratings were used to calculate approximations of the System Usability Scale (SUS) score. Open-ended questions asked the patients about their positive and negative experiences with the patient portal. The statistical analysis included multivariate regression, and the experience narratives were analyzed using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: Of the 1,262,708 logged-in patient users, 4719 responded to the survey, giving a response rate of 0.37%. The patient portal's usability was rated as good, with a mean SUS score of 74.3 (SD 14.0). Reporting a very positive experience with the portal was positively associated with perceived usability (ß=.51; P<.001), whereas reporting a very negative experience was negatively associated with perceived usability (ß=-1.28; P<.001). These variables explained 23% of the variation in perceived usability. The information provided and a lack of information were the most common positive and negative experiences. Furthermore, specific functionalities, such as prescription renewal and the ease of using the patient portal, were often mentioned as very positive experiences. The patients also mentioned negative emotions, such as anger and frustration, as part of their very negative experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The study offers empirical evidence about the significant role of individual experiences when patients are evaluating the usability of patient portals. The results suggest that positive and negative experiences provide relevant information that can be used for improving the patient portal's usability. Usability should be improved so that patients receive information efficiently, easily, and quickly. Respondents would also appreciate interactive features in the patient portal.

Patient Experience from an eHealth Perspective: A Scoping Review of Approaches and Recent Trends.

OBJECTIVES: Patients' experiences are increasingly gaining interest in multiple research fields. Researchers have applied various approaches to studying patient experience (PX); however, there is no commonly agreed-upon definition of PX. This scoping review focuses on PX from an eHealth perspective. Our aim was to: 1) describe how PX has been defined, 2) investigate which factors influencing PX and components of PX have been identified and researched, 3) explore the methods used in studying PX, and 4) find out the recent trends in PX research from an eHealth perspective. METHODS: We selected six major journals covering the fields of health informatics, PX, and nursing informatics. Using the search terms "patient experience" and technology-related terms (e.g., digital, eHealth), we searched for articles published between 2019 and 2021. From 426 articles, 44 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Multiple concepts and meanings are used to refer to PX. Few articles include vague descriptions of the concept. Numerous eHealth factors are influencing PX, as well as components considering PX. The influencing factors were related to eHealth solutions' type and quality, and care process, when the components of PX were related to communication, remote interaction, risks and concerns, and patients' attitudes towards telehealth. Surveys were the main method used to study PX, followed by interviews. CONCLUSIONS: PX is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, and it is described as a synonym for patient satisfaction and telehealth experiences. Further multidisciplinary research is needed to understand PX as a phenomenon and to outline a framework for the research.

Patients' Experiences of Web-Based Access to Electronic Health Records in Finland: Cross-sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals that provide access to electronic health records offer a means for patients to better understand and self-manage their health. Yet, patient access to electronic health records raises many concerns among physicians, and little is known about the use practices and experiences of patients who access their electronic health records via a mature patient portal that has been available for citizens for over five years. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify patients' experiences using a national patient portal to access their electronic health records. In particular, we focused on understanding usability-related perceptions and the benefits and challenges of reading clinical notes written by health care professionals. METHODS: Data were collected from 3135 patient users of the Finnish My Kanta patient portal through a web-based survey in June 2021 (response rate: 0.7%). Patients received an invitation to complete the questionnaire when they logged out of the patient portal. Respondents were asked to rate the usability of the patient portal, and the ratings were used to calculate approximations of the System Usability Scale score. Patients were also asked about the usefulness of features, and whether they had discussed the notes with health professionals. Open-ended questions were used to ask patients about their experiences of the benefits and challenges related to reading health professionals' notes. RESULTS: Overall, patient evaluations of My Kanta were positive, and its usability was rated as good (System Usability Scale score approximation: mean 72.7, SD 15.9). Patients found the portal to be the most useful for managing prescriptions and viewing the results of examinations and medical notes. Viewing notes was the most frequent reason (978/3135, 31.2%) for visiting the portal. Benefits of reading the notes mentioned by patients included remembering and understanding what was said by health professionals and the instructions given during an appointment, the convenience of receiving information about health and care, the capability to check the accuracy of notes, and using the information to support self-management. However, there were challenges related to difficulty in understanding medical terminology, incorrect or inadequate notes, missing notes, and usability. CONCLUSIONS: Patients actively used medical notes to receive information to follow professionals' instructions to take care of their health, and patient access to electronic health records can support self-management. However, for the benefits to be realized, improvements in the quality and availability of medical professionals' notes are necessary. Providing a standard information structure could help patients find the information they need. Furthermore, linking notes to vocabularies and other information sources could also improve the understandability of medical terminology; patient agency could be supported by allowing them to add comments to their notes, and patient trust of the system could be improved by allowing them to control the visibility of the professionals' notes.

Health Care Professionals' Experiences of Web-Based Symptom Checkers for Triage: Cross-sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Web-based symptom checkers are promising tools that provide help to patients seeking guidance on health problems. Many health organizations have started using them to enhance triage. Patients use the symptom checker to report their symptoms online and submit the report to the health care center through the system. Health care professionals (registered nurse, practical nurse, general physician, physiotherapist, etc) receive patient inquiries with urgency rating, decide on actions to be taken, and communicate these to the patients. The success of the adoption, however, depends on whether the tools can efficiently support health care professionals' workflow and achieve their support. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the factors influencing health care professionals' support for a web-based symptom checker for triage. METHODS: Data were collected through a web-based survey of 639 health care professionals using either of the two most used web-based symptom checkers in the Finnish public primary care. Linear regression models were fitted to study the associations between the study variables and health care professionals' support for the symptom checkers. In addition, the health care professionals' comments collected via survey were qualitatively analyzed to elicit additional insights about the benefits and challenges of the clinical use of symptom checkers. RESULTS: Results show that the perceived beneficial influence of the symptom checkers on health care professionals' work and the perceived usability of the tools were positively associated with professionals' support. The perceived benefits to patients and organizational support for use were positively associated, and threat to professionals' autonomy was negatively associated with health care professionals' support. These associations were, however, not independent of other factors included in the models. The influences on professionals' work were both positive and negative; the tools streamlined work by providing preliminary information on patients and reduced the number of phone calls, but they also created extra work as the professionals needed to call patients and ask clarifying questions. Managing time between the use of symptom checkers and other tasks was also challenging. Meanwhile, according to health care professionals' experience, the symptom checkers benefited patients as they received help quickly with a lower threshold for care. CONCLUSIONS: The efficient use of symptom checkers for triage requires usable solutions that support health care professionals' work. High-quality information about the patients' conditions and an efficient way of communicating with patients are needed. Using a new eHealth tool also requires that health organizations and teams reorganize their workflows and work distributions to support clinical processes.

The Factors Associated With Nonuse of and Dissatisfaction With the National Patient Portal in Finland in the Era of COVID-19: Population-Based Cross-sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: In the abnormal circumstances caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, patient portals have supported patient empowerment and engagement by providing patients with access to their health care documents and medical information. However, the potential benefits of patient portals cannot be utilized unless the patients accept and use the services. Disparities in the use of patient portals may exacerbate the already existing inequalities in health care access and health outcomes, possibly increasing the digital inequality in societies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine the factors associated with nonuse of and dissatisfaction with the Finnish nationwide patient portal My Kanta Pages among the users of health care services during the COVID-19 outbreak. Several factors related to sociodemographic characteristics, health, and the use of health care services; experiences of guidance concerning electronic services; and digital skills and attitudes were evaluated. METHODS: A national population survey was sent using stratified sampling to 13,200 Finnish residents who had reached the age of 20 years. Data were collected from September 2020 to February 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents who had used health care services and the internet for transactions or for searching for information in the past 12 months were included in the analyses. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine the adjusted associations of respondent characteristics with the nonuse of My Kanta Pages and dissatisfaction with the service. The inverse probability weighting (IPW) method was applied in all statistical analyses to correct for bias. RESULTS: In total, 3919 (64.9%) of 6034 respondents were included in the study. Most respondents (3330/3919, 85.0%) used My Kanta Pages, and 2841 (85.3%) of them were satisfied. Nonusers (589/3919, 15%) were a minority among all respondents, and only 489 (14.7%) of the 3330 users were dissatisfied with the service. Especially patients without a long-term illness (odds ratio [OR] 2.14, 95% CI 1.48-3.10), those who were not referred to electronic health care services by a professional (OR 2.51, 95% CI 1.70-3.71), and those in need of guidance using online social and health care services (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.41-3.65) were more likely nonusers of the patient portal. Perceptions of poor health (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.51-2.93) and security concerns (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.33-2.62) were associated with dissatisfaction with the service. CONCLUSIONS: Patients without long-term illnesses, those not referred to electronic health care services, and those in need of guidance on the use of online social and health care services seemed to be more likely nonusers of the Finnish nationwide patient portal. Moreover, poor health and security concerns appeared to be associated with dissatisfaction with the service. Interventions to promote referral to electronic health care services by professionals are needed. Attention should be targeted to information security of the service and promotion of the public's confidence in the protection of their confidential data.

Towards digital health equity - a qualitative study of the challenges experienced by vulnerable groups in using digital health services in the COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has given an unprecedented boost to already increased digital health services, which can place many vulnerable groups at risk of digital exclusion. To improve the likelihood of achieving digital health equity, it is necessary to identify and address the elements that may prevent vulnerable groups from benefiting from digital health services. This study examined the challenges experienced by vulnerable groups in using digital health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Qualitative descriptive design was utilized. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between October 2020 and May 2021. The participants (N = 74) were older adults, migrants, mental health service users, high users of health services, and the unemployed. Qualitative content analysis with both inductive and deductive approach was used to analyze the data. Challenges related to the use of digital health services were interpreted through digital determinants of health from the Digital Health Equity Framework. RESULTS: For most of the participants the access to digital health services was hampered by insufficient digital, and / or local language skills. The lack of support and training, poor health, as well as the lack of strong e-identification or suitable devices also prevented the access. Digital services were not perceived to be applicable for all situations or capable of replacing face-to-face services due to the poor communication in the digital environment. Fears and the lack of trust regarding digital platforms were expressed as well as concerns related to the security of the services. Contact with a health care professional was also considered less personal and more prone to misunderstandings in the digital environment than in face-to-face services. Finally, digital alternatives were not always available as desired by participants, or participants were unaware of existing digital services and their value. CONCLUSION: Several development needs in the implementation of digital health services were identified that could improve equal access to and benefits gained from digital services in the future. While digital health services are increasing, traditional face-to-face services will still need to be offered alongside the digital ones to ensure equal access to services.

Electronic Health Record Implementations and Insufficient Training Endanger Nurses' Well-being: Cross-sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: High expectations have been set for the implementations of health information systems (HIS) in health care. However, nurses have been dissatisfied after implementations of HIS. In particular, poorly functioning electronic health records (EHRs) have been found to induce stress and cognitive workload. Moreover, the need to learn new systems may require considerable effort from nurses. Thus, EHR implementations may have an effect on the well-being of nurses. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the associations of EHR-to-EHR implementations and the sufficiency of related training with perceived stress related to information systems (SRIS), time pressure, and cognitive failures among registered nurses. Moreover, we examined the moderating effect of the employment sector (hospital, primary care, social services, and others) on these associations. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional survey study of 3610 registered Finnish nurses in 2020. EHR implementation was measured by assessing whether the work unit of each respondent had implemented or will implement a new EHR (1) within the last 6 months, (2) within the last 12 months, (3) in the next 12 months, and (4) at no point within the last 12 months or in the forthcoming 12 months. The associations were examined using analyses of covariance adjusted for age, gender, and employment sector. RESULTS: The highest levels of SRIS (adjusted mean 4.07, SE 0.05) and time pressure (adjusted mean 4.55, SE 0.06) were observed among those who had experienced an EHR implementation within the last 6 months. The lowest levels of SRIS (adjusted mean 3.26, SE 0.04), time pressure (adjusted mean 4.41, SE 0.05), and cognitive failures (adjusted mean 1.84, SE 0.02) were observed among those who did not experience any completed or forthcoming implementations within 12 months. Nurses who perceived that they had received sufficient implementation-related training experienced less SRIS (F1=153.40, P<.001), time pressure (F1=80.95, P<.001), and cognitive failures (F1=34.96, P<.001) than those who had received insufficient training. Recent implementations and insufficient training were especially strongly associated with high levels of SRIS in hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: EHR implementations and insufficient training related to these implementations may endanger the well-being of nurses and even lead to errors. Thus, it is extremely important for organizations to offer comprehensive training before, during, and after implementations. Moreover, easy-to-use systems that allow transition periods, a re-engineering approach, and user involvement may be beneficial to nurses in the implementation process. Training and other improvements would be especially important in hospitals.

How to Implement Digital Services in a Way That They Integrate Into Routine Work: Qualitative Interview Study Among Health and Social Care Professionals.

BACKGROUND: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly boosted the implementation of digital services worldwide, it has become increasingly important to understand how these solutions are integrated into professionals' routine work. Professionals who are using the services are key influencers in the success of implementations. To ensure successful implementations, it is important to understand the multiprofessional perspective, especially because implementations are likely to increase even more. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine health and social care professionals' experiences of digital service implementations and to identify factors that support successful implementations and should be considered in the future to ensure that the services are integrated into professionals' routine work. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used, in which 8 focus group interviews were conducted with 30 health and social care professionals from 4 different health centers in Finland. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The resulting categories were organized under the components of normalization process theory. RESULTS: Our results suggested 14 practices that should be considered when implementing new digital services into routine work. To get professionals to understand and make sense of the new service, (1) the communication related to the implementation should be comprehensive and continuous and (2) the implementation process should be consistent. (3) A justification for the service being implemented should also be given. The best way to engage the professionals with the service is (4) to give them opportunities to influence and (5) to make sure that they have a positive attitude toward the service. To enact the new service into professionals' routine work, it is important that (6) the organization take a supportive approach by providing support from several easy and efficient sources. The professionals should also have (7) enough time to become familiar with the service, and they should have (8) enough know-how about the service. The training should be (9) targeted individually according to skills and work tasks, and (10) it should be diverse. The impact of the implementation on the professionals' work should be evaluated. The service (11) should be easy to use, and (12) usage monitoring should happen. An opportunity (13) to give feedback on the service should also be offered. Moreover, (14) the service should support professionals' work tasks. CONCLUSIONS: We introduce 14 practices for organizations and service providers on how to ensure sustainable implementation of new digital services and the smooth integration into routine work. It is important to pay more attention to comprehensive and continuing communication. Organizations should conduct a competence assessment before training in order to ensure proper alignment. Follow-ups to the implementation process should be performed to guarantee sustainability of the service. Our findings from a forerunner country of digitalization can be useful for countries that are beginning their service digitalization or further developing their digital services.

Leaders' support for using online symptom checkers in Finnish primary care: Survey study.

Online symptom checkers (SCs) are eHealth solutions that offer healthcare organizations the possibility to empower their patients to independently assess their symptoms. The successful implementation of eHealth solutions, such as SCs, requires a supportive organizational culture and leadership. However, there is limited knowledge about the factors associated with leaders' support for the use of SCs. The aim of the study was to identify the factors associated to primary care leaders' support for SCs in triage and their experiences of the benefits and challenges related to the use of SCs. An online survey was used to collect data from 84 Finnish primary care leaders. The data were analyzed using statistical analysis methods and content analysis. Vision clarity, perceiving efficiency improvements, and considering the service to be beneficial for patients were associated with leaders' support for the service (ß ranging from 0.41 to 0.44, p < 0.001). Leaders' support for the service was also associated with how well the leaders provided information about the service to their subordinates (ß =0.22, p < 0.048). SCs present slightly more challenges than benefits regarding health professionals' work. The developers of SCs should focus more on features that decrease health professionals' workload as well as how the solution can benefit patients.

Building Primary Health Care Personnel's Support for a Patient Portal While Alleviating eHealth-Related Stress: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel's (HCP) engagement in patient portal implementation is necessary in embedding the use of the portal in everyday practices of a health care organization. While portal implementation may raise personnel's positive expectations of the benefits in patient care, it is often also stressful for them due to increased workloads and disruptions in clinical workflows. An understanding of social and technical factors that build personnel's support for patient portal implementation and alleviate their eHealth-related stress is therefore needed to realize the full potential of portals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the influence of managerial implementation practices, information technology (IT) usability, and personnel's eHealth competences on support for patient portal implementation and eHealth-related stress among primary HCP. METHODS: The data were collected through a survey of 919 members at 2 health organizations in Finland. Linear and logistic regression models were fitted to study the associations between the variables. RESULTS: Professionals' eHealth competence (ß=.15, P<.001), usability (ß=.11, P<.001), and implementation practices (ß=.07, P<.001) were positively associated with professionals' support and negatively associated with professionals eHealth-related stress (ß=-.07, P=.010; ß=-.27, P<.001; and ß=-.14, P<.001, respectively). Professionals' support was associated with their promotion of the portal to the patients (odds ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.07-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of appropriate implementation practices and the usability of the technology can build personnel's support for a patient portal and alleviate their stress related to eHealth. Personnel's support is manifested in their promotion of the portal to patients. Health care managers are encouraged to consider the usability of the technology and the good implementation practices, such as proper informing, engagement of the personnel in planning the services, and allocation of resources to improve eHealth competence, as prerequisites for meaningful and sustainable use of patient portals.

STAR Duodecim eHealth Tool to Recognize Chronic Disease Risk Factors and Change Unhealthy Lifestyle Choices Among the Long-Term Unemployed: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle choices and socioeconomic status have a significant impact on the expected onset of diseases, age of death, and risk factors concerning long-term illnesses and morbidity. STAR is an online health examination tool, which gives users a report that includes an evaluation of their life expectancy and an estimated risk for developing common long-term illnesses based on questions about health, characteristics, lifestyle, and quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study are to (1) review the capacity of STAR to recognize morbidity risks in comparison to a traditional nurse-led health examination and patient-reported health challenges; (2) evaluate the user experience and usability of STAR; and (3) assess the potential impact of STAR on the health confidence and motivation of patients to make healthier lifestyle choices. METHODS: This mixed methods validation study will consist of a quantitative part (questionnaires) and a qualitative part (phone interviews and open-ended questions from the questionnaires). The participants will include 100 long-term unemployed individuals attending a health check for the unemployed. The participants will be recruited from three Finnish public health centers in Espoo, Hämeenlinna, and Tampere. At the health centers, the participants will use STAR and attend a nurse's health check. Surveys with multiple-choice and open-ended questions will be collected from the participants, the nurse, and a study assistant. The questionnaires include questions about the participant's background and health challenges from the patient and nurse points of view, as well as questions about how well the health challenges matched the STAR report. The questionnaires also gather data about user experience, health confidence, and usability of STAR. A study assistant will fill out an observer's form containing questions about use time and possible problems encountered while using STAR. A sample of the unemployed participants will be interviewed by telephone subsequently. For the quantitative data, descriptive statistics and a reliability analysis will be performed, and mean sum scores will be computed for the study variables. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data will be performed. RESULTS: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Expert Responsibility Area of Tampere University Hospital in June 2020 (ETL Code R20067). Data collection will begin in June 2021 and will take approximately 3-6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Online health examinations can improve the effectiveness of primary prevention in health care by supporting efficient evidence-based morbidity risk estimation and motivating patients to change unhealthy behaviors. A multimethod approach is used to allow for assessment of the tool's usefulness from the points of view of both professionals and patients. This study will further provide a rich understanding of how the tool can be used as part of routine health checks, and how and why the tool may or may not motivate users for making healthier lifestyle choices. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/27668.

Remote Interviews and Visual Timelines with Patients: Lessons Learned.

This article aims to support the design of remote user studies in the healthcare and well-being field. We introduce lessons learned from conducting remote interviews and using visual timelines as pretasks involving patients from two eHealth projects. Based on our experience, we conclude that remote interviews and visual timelines can provide rich data about user needs. However, careful planning is required. Building trust, rapport, confidentiality, and privacy requires extra effort from the researcher in studies involving sensitive topics. In this paper, we present a list of practical tips for planning qualitative health-related user studies.

Health Care Professionals' Experiences of Patient-Professional Communication Over Patient Portals: Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.

BACKGROUND: The popularity of web-based patient-professional communication over patient portals is constantly increasing. Good patient-professional communication is a prerequisite for high-quality care and patient centeredness. Understanding health care professionals' experiences of web-based patient-professional communication is important as they play a key role in engaging patients to use portals. More information is needed on how patient-professional communication could be supported by patient portals in health care. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review of qualitative studies aims to identify how health care professionals experience web-based patient-professional communication over the patient portals. METHODS: Abstract and full-text reviews were conducted by 2 reviewers independently. A total of 4 databases were used for the study: CINAHL (EBSCO), ProQuest (ABI/INFORM), Scopus, and PubMed. The inclusion criteria for the reviewed studies were as follows: the examination of health care professionals' experiences, reciprocal communication between patients and health care professionals, peer-reviewed scientific articles, and studies published between 2010 and 2019. The Joanna Briggs Institute's quality assessment criteria were used in the review process. A total of 13 included studies were analyzed using a thematic synthesis, which was conducted by 3 reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 6 analytical themes concerning health care professionals' experiences of web-based patient-professional communication were identified. The themes were related to health care professionals' work, change in communication over patient portals, patients' use of patient portals, the suitability of patient portals for communication, the convenience of patient portals for communication, and change in roles. CONCLUSIONS: Health care professionals' experiences contain both positive and negative insights into web-based patient-professional communication over patient portals. Most commonly, the positive experiences seem to be related to the patients and patient outcomes, such as having better patient engagement. Health care professionals also have negative experiences, for example, web-based patient-professional communication sometimes has deficiencies and has a negative impact on their workload. These negative experiences may be explained by the poor functionality of the patient portals and insufficient training and resources. To reduce health care professionals' negative experiences of web-based patient-professional communication, their experiences should be taken into account by policy makers, health care organizations, and information technology enterprises when developing patient portals. In addition, more training regarding web-based patient-professional communication and patient portals should be provided to health care professionals.

Applying and Extending the FITT Framework to Identify the Challenges and Opportunities of Successful eHealth Services for Patient Self-Management: Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: The number of public eHealth services that support patient self-management is rapidly increasing. However, the implementation of these eHealth services for self-management has encountered challenges. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper was to analyze the challenges and opportunities of implementing eHealth services for self-management by focusing on the fit between the technical solution and clinical use. METHODS: We performed in-depth interviews with 10 clinical project coordinators and managers who were responsible for developing and implementing various eHealth services for self-management interventions in five university hospitals in Finland. The results were analyzed using content analysis and open coding. The Fit between Individuals, Task, and Technology (FITT) framework was used to interpret the findings. RESULTS: The implementation of self-management services involved many challenges related to technical problems, health professional acceptance, patient motivation, and health organization and management. The implementers identified practices to manage the identified challenges, including improving the design of the technology, supporting health professionals in the adoption of the eHealth services, changing the work processes and tasks, involving patients, and collectively planning the implementation inside an organization. The findings could be mostly attributed to the dimensions of the FITT framework. CONCLUSIONS: The FITT framework helped to analyze the challenges related to the implementation, and most of them were related to poor fit. The importance of patients as stakeholders in eHealth services for patient self-management needs to be highlighted. Thus, we propose that patients should be added as a different type of individual dimension to the FITT framework. In addition, the framework could be extended to include organization and management in a new context dimension.

Health Professionals' Experiences of the Benefits and Challenges of Online Symptom Checkers.

Online symptom checkers and assessment services are used by patients seeking guidance on health problems. In this study, the goal was to identify health professionals' experiences of the benefits and challenges of new symptom checkers providing triage advice. Data was collected through an online survey of 61 health professionals who were target users of the online symptom checkers implemented in six public health organizations and one private occupational health clinic. Most of the health professionals supported the use of online symptom checkers and found services useful to patients because they provided patients quick contact with health professionals and referral to care or self-management instructions regardless of time and place. Health professionals were less confident that most of the patients were capable and willing to use the symptom checkers. Health professionals were satisfied with symptom checkers providing them with more useful information before meeting patients. By contrast, symptom checkers were seen as disrupting clinical work and time-consuming. The results imply that the clinical work processes should be redesigned to guide patients in an efficient manner, avoid work overlap, and provide work motivation for professionals.