Patient and Caregiver Use of Patient Portal Features

<h3>Context:</h3> Patient portals (PPs) are online healthcare platforms enabling patients access their electronic health records and offering different features to help patients manage their care such as viewing and entering health information, and permitting asynchronous communication between patients and their providers. The onset of COVID-19 propelled the rapid integration of PPs in primary care; however, little is known about the desirability of their various features. <h3>Objective:</h3> Describe the use, and anticipated use for those without PP access, of PPs in primary care (PC) and how these relate to the patient’s sociodemographic factors. <h3>Study Design and Analysis:</h3> Cross-sectional survey of virtual care in PC in patients and caregivers. Caregivers reported on behalf of their charge. Questions included the use of PP, or anticipated use if it didn’t offer any, of five PP features: communication with practice, viewing records, entering information (e.g. blood pressure) into record, receiving information from practice, and scheduling appointments. We report on the use of features and associations between patient sociodemographic factors combining patient and caregiver responses and PP use, categorized into use ‘at least one feature’ and ‘no feature’. <h3>Dataset:</h3> We used a section of a larger cross sectional survey on virtual care conducted Dec 2022-Mar 2023. <h3>Population:</h3> Ontario patients and caregivers 18+ years with at least one virtual PC appointment in the past 12 months. <h3>Outcome Measures:</h3> Use and anticipated use of PP features, and their associations with sociodemographic factors. <h3>Results:</h3> Patients(P), n=743; Caregivers(C), n=227. Respondents were 65+ years (P:9%;C:23% (i.e. in 23% their charge was &gt;65), unemployed (P:19%;C:49%), and non-male (P:56%;C:46%). Respondents with PP access (P:58%;C:62%) report using at least one PP feature (P:98%;C:96%), and those without PP access report anticipated use of features (P:89%;C:92%). Amongst those with PP access, older individuals (&gt;65 years:14% vs &lt;65 years:1%); unemployed ((6%) vs employed (1%)); non-English speakers ((9%) vs English speakers (1%)) were significantly more likely to report not using any feature. Amongst those without PP access single individuals ((17%) vs not single (3%)) were significantly more likely to report not using any feature. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The study provides an overview of the use and anticipated use of PP features among different demographic groups and highlights the need to enhance PP us

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Annals of Family Medicine
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.22.s1.6663
Primary Topic
Electronic Health Records Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Patient and Caregiver Use of Patient Portal Features

Rachelle Ashcroft, Simone Dahrouge, Simon Lam, Kiran Saluja et al.
The Annals of Family Medicine
Electronic Health Records Systems
article

Patient and Caregiver Use of Patient Portal Features

Rachelle Ashcroft, Simone Dahrouge, Simon Lam, Kiran Saluja, Alexis Aomreore
article en

Abstract

<h3>Context:</h3> Patient portals (PPs) are online healthcare platforms enabling patients access their electronic health records and offering different features to help patients manage their care such as viewing and entering health information, and permitting asynchronous communication between patients and their providers. The onset of COVID-19 propelled the rapid integration of PPs in primary care; however, little is known about the desirability of their various features. <h3>Objective:</h3> Describe the use, and anticipated use for those without PP access, of PPs in primary care (PC) and how these relate to the patient’s sociodemographic factors. <h3>Study Design and Analysis:</h3> Cross-sectional survey of virtual care in PC in patients and caregivers. Caregivers reported on behalf of their charge. Questions included the use of PP, or anticipated use if it didn’t offer any, of five PP features: communication with practice, viewing records, entering information (e.g. blood pressure) into record, receiving information from practice, and scheduling appointments. We report on the use of features and associations between patient sociodemographic factors combining patient and caregiver responses and PP use, categorized into use ‘at least one feature’ and ‘no feature’. <h3>Dataset:</h3> We used a section of a larger cross sectional survey on virtual care conducted Dec 2022-Mar 2023. <h3>Population:</h3> Ontario patients and caregivers 18+ years with at least one virtual PC appointment in the past 12 months. <h3>Outcome Measures:</h3> Use and anticipated use of PP features, and their associations with sociodemographic factors. <h3>Results:</h3> Patients(P), n=743; Caregivers(C), n=227. Respondents were 65+ years (P:9%;C:23% (i.e. in 23% their charge was &gt;65), unemployed (P:19%;C:49%), and non-male (P:56%;C:46%). Respondents with PP access (P:58%;C:62%) report using at least one PP feature (P:98%;C:96%), and those without PP access report anticipated use of features (P:89%;C:92%). Amongst those with PP access, older individuals (&gt;65 years:14% vs &lt;65 years:1%); unemployed ((6%) vs employed (1%)); non-English speakers ((9%) vs English speakers (1%)) were significantly more likely to report not using any feature. Amongst those without PP access single individuals ((17%) vs not single (3%)) were significantly more likely to report not using any feature. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The study provides an overview of the use and anticipated use of PP features among different demographic groups and highlights the need to enhance PP us

The Annals of Family MedicineVol. 22(Supplement 1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Electronic Health Records Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.