A Multi-Level Analysis of Individual and Neighborhood Factors Associated with Patient Portal Use among Adult Emergency Department Patients with Multimorbidity.

Background: Patient portals tethered to electronic health records (EHR) have become vital to patient engagement and better disease management, specifically among adults with multimorbidity. We determined individual and neighborhood factors associated with patient portal use (MyChart) among adult patients with multimorbidity seen in an Emergency Department (ED). Methods: This study adopted a cross-sectional study design and used a linked database of EHR from a single ED site to patients' neighborhood characteristics (i.e., zip code level) from the American Community Survey. The study population included all adults (age > 18 years), with at least one visit to an ED and multimorbidity between 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020 (N = 40,544). Patient and neighborhood characteristics were compared among patients with and without MyChart use. Random-intercept multi-level logistic regressions were used to analyze the associations of patient and neighborhood factors with MyChart use. Results: Only 19% (N = 7757) of adults with multimorbidity used the patient portal. In the fully adjusted multi-level model, at the patient level, having a primary care physician (AOR = 5.55, 95% CI 5.07−6.07, p < 0.001) and health insurance coverage (AOR = 2.41, 95% CI 2.23−2.61, p < 0.001) were associated with MyChart use. At the neighborhood level, 4.73% of the variation in MyChart use was due to differences in neighborhood factors. However, significant heterogeneity existed in patient portal use when neighborhood characteristics were included in the model. Conclusions: Among ED patients with multimorbidity, one in five adults used patient portals. Patient-level factors, such as having primary care physicians and insurance, may promote patient portal use.

The Association of Name Recognition, Empathy Perception, and Satisfaction With Resident Physicians' Care Amongst Patients in an Academic Emergency Department.

Background: Recognition of the provider's name, provider empathy, and the patient's satisfaction with their care are patient-provider rapport measures. This study aimed to determine: 1) resident physicians' name recognition by patients in the emergency department; and 2) name recognition in association with patient perception of the resident's empathy and their satisfaction with the resident's care. Methods: This was a prospective observational study. A patient recognizing a resident physician was defined as the patient remembering a resident's name, understanding the level of training, and understanding a resident's role in patient care. A patient's perception of resident physician empathy was measured by the Jefferson Scale of Patient Perception of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE). Patient satisfaction of the resident was measured utilizing a real-time satisfaction survey. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to determine the association amongst patient recognition of resident physicians, JSPPPE, and patient satisfaction after adjustments were made for demographics and resident training level. Results: We enrolled 30 emergency medicine resident physicians and 191 patients. Only 26% of studied patients recognized resident physicians. High JSPPPE scores were given by 39% of patients recognizing resident physicians compared to 5% of those who were not recognized (P = 0.013). High patient satisfaction scores were recorded in 31% of patients who recognized resident physicians compared to 7% who did not (P = 0.008). The adjusted odds ratios of patient recognition of resident physicians to high JSPPPE and high satisfaction scores were 5.29 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33 - 21.02, P = 0.018) and 6.12 (1.84 - 20.38, P = 0.003) respectively. Conclusions: Patient recognition of resident physicians is low in our study. However, patient recognition of resident physicians is associated with a higher patient perception of physician empathy and higher patient satisfaction. Our study suggests that resident education advocating for patient recognition of their healthcare provider's status needs to be emphasized as part of patient-centered health care.

Older cancer patients in cancer clinical trials are underrepresented. Systematic literature review of almost 5000 meta- and pooled analyses of phase III randomized trials of survival from breast, prostate and lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Older people represent increasing proportions of the population with cancer. To understand the representivity of cancer treatments in older people, we performed a systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines of the age distribution of clinical trial participants for three leading cancer types, namely breast, prostate, and lung. METHODS: We used PubMed to identify articles detailing meta or pooled-analyses of phase III, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of survival for breast, prostate and lung cancer, published ≤5 years from 2016. We compared the age distribution of participants to that of these cancers for "More developed regions". RESULTS: 4993 potential papers were identified, but only three papers on breast cancer, three on lung cancer, and none on prostate cancer presented the age distribution of their participants. Except for one paper of breast cancer, participants ≥70 years in all other papers were underrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the age distribution of patients be clearly reported in all clinical trials, as per guidelines. Clinical trials ought to be more representative of the populations most affected by the disease for which treatments are being tested. This should lead to better knowledge of effectiveness of treatments and better translation of trial results to optimal care of older cancer patients.