Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Nov 18, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 22, 2018 - Dec 27, 2018
Date Accepted: Feb 17, 2019
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Patient portals facilitating engagement with inpatient electronic medical records: A systematic review
ABSTRACT
Background:
Engaging patients in the delivery of healthcare has the potential to improve health outcomes and patient satisfaction. Patient portals may enhance patient engagement; by enabling patients to access their electronic medical records (EMRs) and facilitating secure patient-provider communication.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to review literature describing patient portals tethered to an EMR in inpatient settings, their role in patient engagement, and their impact on healthcare delivery in order to identify factors and best practices for successful implementation of this technology, and areas that require further research.
Methods:
A systematic search for articles in the PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases was conducted, using keywords associated with patient engagement, electronic health records and patient portals, and their respective subject headings in each database. Articles for inclusion were evaluated for quality using ‘A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews’ (AMSTAR 2) for systematic review articles and the ‘Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs’ (QATSDD) for empirical studies. Included studies were categorized by their focus on input factors (e.g., portal design), process factors (e.g., portal usage), and output factors (e.g., benefits), and by the valence of their findings regarding patient portals (i.e., positive, negative, or mixed).
Results:
The systematic search identified 58 articles for inclusion. The ‘inputs’ category was addressed by 40 articles, while the ‘processes’ and ‘outputs’ categories were addressed by 36 and 46 articles, respectively; 47 articles addressed multiple themes across the three categories and 11 addressed only a single theme. Nineteen articles had high to very high quality, 21 had medium quality and 18 had low to very low quality. Findings in the ‘inputs’ category showed wide-ranging portal designs; patients’ privacy concerns and lack of encouragement were among portal adoption barriers while information access and communication were facilitators. Several methods were used to train portal users with varying success. In the ‘processes’ category, socio-demographic characteristics and medical conditions of patients were predictors of portal usage; some patients wanted unlimited access to their EMRs, personalized medical education and non-clinical information; and patients were keen to use portals for communicating with their healthcare teams. In the ‘outputs’ category, some but not all studies found patient portals improved patient engagement; patients perceived some portal functions inadequate but others useful; patients and staff thought portals may improve patient care but could cause anxiety in some patients; and portals improved patient safety, adherence to medications, patient-provider communication but had no impact on objective health outcomes.
Conclusions:
While the evidence is currently immature, patient portals have demonstrated benefit by enabling the discovery of medical errors, improving adherence to medications and patient-provider communication, etc. High-quality studies are needed to fully understand, improve and evaluate their impact.
Citation
Per the author's request the PDF is not available.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.