Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.
Who will be affected?
Readers: No access to all 28 journals. We recommend accessing our articles via PubMed Central
Authors: No access to the submission form or your user account.
Reviewers: No access to your user account. Please download manuscripts you are reviewing for offline reading before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Editors: No access to your user account to assign reviewers or make decisions.
Copyeditors: No access to user account. Please download manuscripts you are copyediting before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Secure messaging for diabetes management: Content Analysis
Stephanie Alayne Robinson;
Mark Zocchi;
Carolyn Purington;
Linda Am;
Kathryn DeLaughter;
Varsha G. Vimalananda;
Dane Netherton;
Arlene S. Ash;
Timothy P. Hogan;
Stephanie L. Shimada
ABSTRACT
Background:
Secure messaging use is associated with improved diabetes-related outcomes. However, it is less clear how secure messaging supports diabetes management.
Objective:
We examined secure message topics between patients and clinical team members in a national sample of Veterans with type 2 diabetes to understand use of secure messaging for diabetes management and potential associations with glycemic control.
Methods:
We surveyed and analyzed the content of secure messages between 448 US Veterans Health Administration patients with type 2 diabetes and their clinical teams. We also explored the relationship between secure messaging content and glycemic control.
Results:
Explicit diabetes-related content was the most frequent topic (72.1% of participants), followed by blood pressure (31.7% of participants). Among diabetes-related conversations, 90.7% of patients discussed medication renewals or refills. More participants with good glycemic control engaged in ≥ 1 thread about blood pressure compared to those with poor control (37.5% vs 27.2%, P=.022). More patients with good glycemic control engaged in ≥ 1 thread intended to share information with their clinical team about an aspect of their diabetes management compared to those with poor control (23.7% vs. 12.4%, P=.009).
Conclusions:
There were few differences in secure messaging topic between patients in good versus poor glycemic control. Those in good control were more likely to engage in informational messages to their team and send messages related to blood pressure. It may be that the specific topic content of the secure messages may not be that important for diabetic control. Simply making it easier for patients to communicate with their clinical teams may be the driving influence between associations previously reported in the literature between secure messaging and positive clinical outcomes in diabetes.
Citation
Please cite as:
Robinson SA, Zocchi M, Purington C, Am L, DeLaughter K, Vimalananda VG, Netherton D, Ash AS, Hogan TP, Shimada SL
Secure Messaging for Diabetes Management: Content Analysis