Portable personal health records: can they improve patient safety?

Prescriber ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (19) ◽  
pp. 9-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Pagliari ◽  
Bernard Fernando
2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (01) ◽  
pp. 22-29
Author(s):  
D. W. Bates ◽  
J. S. Einbinder

SummaryTo examine five areas that we will be central to informatics research in the years to come: changing provider behavior and improving outcomes, secondary uses of clinical data, using health information technology to improve patient safety, personal health records, and clinical data exchange.Potential articles were identified through Medline and Internet searches and were selected for inclusion in this review by the authors.We review highlights from the literature in these areas over the past year, drawing attention to key points and opportunities for future work.Informatics may be a key tool for helping to improve patient care quality, safety, and efficiency. However, questions remain about how best to use existing technologies, deploy new ones, and to evaluate the effects. A great deal of research has been done on changing provider behavior, but most work to date has shown that process benefits are easier to achieve than outcomes benefits, especially for chronic diseases. Use of secondary data (data warehouses and disease registries) has enormous potential, though published research is scarce. It is now clear in most nations that one of the key tools for improving patient safety will be information technology— many more studies of different approaches are needed in this area. Finally, both personal health records and clinical data exchange appear to be potentially transformative developments, but much of the published research to date on these topics appears to be taking place in the U.S.— more research from other nations is needed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117863292110247
Author(s):  
Soumya Upadhyay ◽  
William Opoku-Agyeman

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) have the potential to alleviate patient safety mistakes. Of the various levels of EHR, advanced or higher-level functionalities of EHR are designed to improve patient safety. Certain organizational and environmental factors may pose as barriers toward implementing all of the functionalities, leaving certain hospitals intermediate between basic and comprehensive levels of implementation. This study identifies a comprehensive categorical classification that includes hospitals that have functionalities between basic and comprehensive levels of EHR and determines the organizational and environmental factors that may influence hospitals to implement one or more combinations of these categories. A longitudinal panel design was used. Ordinal logistic regression with random effects model was fitted with robust cluster standard errors. Our sample consisted of non-federal general acute care hospitals utilizing a panel design from 2010 to 2016 with 17 586 hospital-year observations (or an average of 2600 hospitals per year). Larger size hospitals, ones with higher total margin, metropolitan and urban hospitals, system affiliated hospitals, and those in higher managed care penetration areas have higher odds of belonging in one of the higher categories of EHR implementation. Hospitals that can access a greater amount of human resources and financial assets from their environments, may implement higher levels of EHR. Initial and maintenance costs of EHR, interoperability issues, and inability to distribute high costs of training across facilities may stymie implementation of higher EHR functionalities. Policymaking to encourage competition among vendors may possibly lower the implementation price for hospitals with limited resources.


Author(s):  
Henry Feldman ◽  
Elizabeth S. Rodriguez

Overview: Personal health records (PHRs) and patients' access to their own clinical information through a patient portal are changing the patient-physician relationship. Historically, health care providers have been gatekeepers of patients' medical records. Now, these portals provide patients access to clinical information, electronic messaging with the clinical team, and appointment and billing information. This type of access supports patient empowerment by engaging patients in their own care. Patients desire online access to information. The health care industry, like any other, must respond to the needs of its consumers. Oncology practices face unique challenges to meeting this need because of the complex nature of medical records of patients with cancer. Health care providers worry about the consequences of patients receiving “bad news” online, thereby increasing patient anxiety. This anxiety may, in turn, increase providers' workload by creating additional calls or visits to the office. These valid concerns require careful consideration when implementing a PHR or patient portal into a practice. Providers will benefit from a clear understanding of actual compared with potential risks and benefits. Much of the concerns about the negative effect on providers' workload and the potential increase in patients' anxiety have not been borne out. On the other hand, the implementation strategy, governance structure, and end-user education are crucial components to ensuring success. Successful implementation of a PHR or patient portal affords the opportunity to improve patient satisfaction and increase efficiency in provider workflow. The possibility exists to improve patient outcomes by engaging the patient in decision making and follow through.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document