Feasibility and Acceptability of Using an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measure via a Patient Portal in HIV care

<h3>Context:</h3> Adherence to antiretrovirals (ART) is essential for people with HIV (PWH), but many face barriers. The I-Score is a new electronic patient-reported outcome measure (ePROM) of ART adherence barriers to be used in HIV care. <h3>Objective:</h3> To assess the feasibility and acceptability of administering the I-Score on a patient portal. <h3>Study Design Analysis:</h3> 6-month one-arm implementation pilot study. <h3>Setting:</h3> A large hospital-based clinic in Montreal, Canada. <h3>Population:</h3> PWH on ART, speaking French or English, owning a smartphone, willing to use the patient portal, reporting adherence issues. <h3>Intervention/Instrument:</h3> Patients visited their HIV physician at Time 1 (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3). Before visits, they completed the I-Score. After visits, they completed a survey on sociodemographic characteristics (T1), and feasibility and acceptability of the I-Score. <h3>Outcome Measures:</h3> Feasibility was assessed with consent and retention rates; frequency of technological problems; and the 4-item Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). Acceptability was evaluated with the adapted 6-item Acceptability E-scale for web-based PROMs (AES); and the 4-item Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM). We provide descriptive statistics. <h3>Results:</h3> Out of 34 PWH with identified adherence issues, 32/34 (94%) consented. Average age was 48 years (standard deviation (SD)=15), 12/32 (38%) were women, 19/32 (59%), migrants, and 10/32 (31%) lived below the poverty line. Overall, 26/32 (81%) completed the study, for a total of 78 visits; 4 were lost-to-follow-up and 2 withdrew due to difficulties with technology. During T1, T2, and T3, there were 12/26 (46%), 17/26 (65%), and 16/26 (62%) participants, respectively, reporting no technological problem. Problems met included needing to: remind patients to complete the I-Score before medical visit (15 visits); re-initialize passwords (8); resolve connectivity issues (2); and re-install the patient portal (2). Physicians could not access I-Score results at 4 visits; 10 visits were postponed due to difficulties. Average scores on FIM increased from 17/20 (T1;SD=5), to 18/20 (T2;2), to 19/20 (T3;2). Average AES increased from 24/30 (SD=5), to 26/30 (3), to 27/30 (3). Average AIM scores passed from 16/20 (5), to 18/20 (2), to 17/20 (3). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The feasibility and acceptability of using a patient portal to administer the I-Score ePROM was high for vulnerable PWH, but use was challenged by patient literacy and technology.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.22.s1.6158
Primary Topic
Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Feasibility and Acceptability of Using an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measure via a Patient Portal in HIV care

David Lessard, Kim Engler, Bertrand Lebouché, Alexandra de Pokomandy et al.
Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
article

Feasibility and Acceptability of Using an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measure via a Patient Portal in HIV care

David Lessard, Kim Engler, Bertrand Lebouché, Alexandra de Pokomandy, Tarek Hijal, Cecilia T. Costiniuk, Ashkan Baradaran, Joseph Cox, MA Yuanchao
article en

Abstract

<h3>Context:</h3> Adherence to antiretrovirals (ART) is essential for people with HIV (PWH), but many face barriers. The I-Score is a new electronic patient-reported outcome measure (ePROM) of ART adherence barriers to be used in HIV care. <h3>Objective:</h3> To assess the feasibility and acceptability of administering the I-Score on a patient portal. <h3>Study Design Analysis:</h3> 6-month one-arm implementation pilot study. <h3>Setting:</h3> A large hospital-based clinic in Montreal, Canada. <h3>Population:</h3> PWH on ART, speaking French or English, owning a smartphone, willing to use the patient portal, reporting adherence issues. <h3>Intervention/Instrument:</h3> Patients visited their HIV physician at Time 1 (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3). Before visits, they completed the I-Score. After visits, they completed a survey on sociodemographic characteristics (T1), and feasibility and acceptability of the I-Score. <h3>Outcome Measures:</h3> Feasibility was assessed with consent and retention rates; frequency of technological problems; and the 4-item Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). Acceptability was evaluated with the adapted 6-item Acceptability E-scale for web-based PROMs (AES); and the 4-item Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM). We provide descriptive statistics. <h3>Results:</h3> Out of 34 PWH with identified adherence issues, 32/34 (94%) consented. Average age was 48 years (standard deviation (SD)=15), 12/32 (38%) were women, 19/32 (59%), migrants, and 10/32 (31%) lived below the poverty line. Overall, 26/32 (81%) completed the study, for a total of 78 visits; 4 were lost-to-follow-up and 2 withdrew due to difficulties with technology. During T1, T2, and T3, there were 12/26 (46%), 17/26 (65%), and 16/26 (62%) participants, respectively, reporting no technological problem. Problems met included needing to: remind patients to complete the I-Score before medical visit (15 visits); re-initialize passwords (8); resolve connectivity issues (2); and re-install the patient portal (2). Physicians could not access I-Score results at 4 visits; 10 visits were postponed due to difficulties. Average scores on FIM increased from 17/20 (T1;SD=5), to 18/20 (T2;2), to 19/20 (T3;2). Average AES increased from 24/30 (SD=5), to 26/30 (3), to 27/30 (3). Average AIM scores passed from 16/20 (5), to 18/20 (2), to 17/20 (3). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The feasibility and acceptability of using a patient portal to administer the I-Score ePROM was high for vulnerable PWH, but use was challenged by patient literacy and technology.

Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
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.