Difference between revisions of "Patient portal"
Ajaydhawan (Talk | contribs) |
Ajaydhawan (Talk | contribs) (→Issues) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
== Issues == | == Issues == | ||
| + | |||
| + | The recent release of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Stage 2 meaningful use (MU) proposed regulations includes numerous physician and hospital requirements, including secure messaging platforms and patients’ online access to viewing, downloading, and transmitting their PHI (including electronic hospital discharge summaries and clinical summaries after provider visits) by 2014. | ||
Although patient portals seem to be good for the patient, most clinicians feel they would increase their workload significantly(5). In the study by Staroselsky, the patient’s emailed information about medication discrepancies to the clinicians but the majority of clinicians did not act upon them. | Although patient portals seem to be good for the patient, most clinicians feel they would increase their workload significantly(5). In the study by Staroselsky, the patient’s emailed information about medication discrepancies to the clinicians but the majority of clinicians did not act upon them. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 17: | ||
There were also some concerns expressed by patients about privacy and security of information. | There were also some concerns expressed by patients about privacy and security of information. | ||
| − | In summary, patient portals appear to be embraced and accepted by patients, but clinicians view portals less favorably due to the perception that their workload will be increased. There are also issues with the viewing of medical information by persons with no medical training and a limited ability to interpret that information. | + | In summary, patient portals appear to be embraced and accepted by patients, but clinicians view portals less favorably due to the perception that their workload will be increased. There are also issues with the viewing of medical information by persons with no medical training and a limited ability to interpret that information.Consumers have, perhaps, the greatest opportunity to expand their role in their own health care with the use of web portals and PHRs, as these tools offer access to and patient-centered control of PHI in ways not previously available without HIT. |
== References == | == References == | ||
Revision as of 01:34, 26 May 2013
Patient portals are a becoming a more common component or add-on to clinical information systems and their own personal health records.This portal is usually a secure website for patients, typically maintained by provider practices, that offers access to a variety of functions linked to a physician’s EHR including secure messaging, protected health information (e.g., lab results, medication lists, and immunizations), appointment scheduling, and tethered PHRs; more advanced portals may offer programs for self-management or patient questionnaires.
Benefits
The ability for a patient to view and potentially affect the input of information into their electronic medical record may enhance the accuracy of the record itself and potentially improve the quality of care for that patient. In a study by Hassol et, al.(1),the majority of patients were satisfied with the accuracy and completeness of their records as well as the ease of use and ability to communicate with their clinician. Similar results were found in a study by Ralston et, al. (2), Patients were most satisfied with their ability to request medication refills, communicate electronically with their provider and view test results.
Another study by Schnipper et, al.(3), showed that the accuracy of medication lists was improved by use of a patient portal. However in a similar study by Staroselsky and colleagues(4), there was no improvement in accuracy of medication lists between patients using a portal vs. those who did not. Both of these studies relied on the clinicians to accept the information provided by the patient and update the medication lists.
Issues
The recent release of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Stage 2 meaningful use (MU) proposed regulations includes numerous physician and hospital requirements, including secure messaging platforms and patients’ online access to viewing, downloading, and transmitting their PHI (including electronic hospital discharge summaries and clinical summaries after provider visits) by 2014.
Although patient portals seem to be good for the patient, most clinicians feel they would increase their workload significantly(5). In the study by Staroselsky, the patient’s emailed information about medication discrepancies to the clinicians but the majority of clinicians did not act upon them.
There was also patient dissatisfaction with the ability to view their lab results. In the studies by Hassol and Ralston, there was less satisfaction with lab review than other components of the portal. Many patients were concerned about what they perceived as abnormal results that were not adequately explained by their clinician.
There were also some concerns expressed by patients about privacy and security of information.
In summary, patient portals appear to be embraced and accepted by patients, but clinicians view portals less favorably due to the perception that their workload will be increased. There are also issues with the viewing of medical information by persons with no medical training and a limited ability to interpret that information.Consumers have, perhaps, the greatest opportunity to expand their role in their own health care with the use of web portals and PHRs, as these tools offer access to and patient-centered control of PHI in ways not previously available without HIT.
References
- Hassol A, Walker JM, Patient Experiences and Attitudes about Access to a Patient Electronic Health Record and Linked Web Messaging J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2004 Nov-Dec; 11(6):505-13
- Ralston JD, Carrell D, Patient Web Services Integrated with a Shared Medical Record: patient use and satisfaction J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Mar-Apr; 15(2): 265
- Schnipper JL, Gandhi TK, Design and Implementation of a Web-based Patient Portal Linked to an Electronic Health Record Designed to Improve Medication Safety: the Patient Gateway Medications Module Inform Prim Care.2008; 16(2);147-55
- Staroselsky M, Volk LA, An Effort to Improve Electronic Health Record Medication List Accuracy Between Visits: patients’ and physicians’ responses Int J Med Inform.2008 Mar;77(3):153-60
- Siteman E, Businger A, Clinicians Recognize Value of Patient Review of Their Electronic Health Data AMIA Annu Symp. Proc. 2006; 2006: 1101
Submitted by Melody Schniepp M.D.
