Search

Study objective There is a continued movement toward health data transparency, accelerated by the 21st Century CURES Act, which mandated the automatic and immediate release of clinical notes, often termed "open notes." Differences in utilization among different patient demographics and disproportionately affected populations within the emergency department (ED) are not yet known. Methods This was an observational study of 10 EDs and 3 urgent care centers across a single health system over a 13-week period from February 1, 2021 to May 2, 2021. Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients with patient portal access to open notes at the time of encounter, the proportion of patients with access who opened the clinical note, and time from clinical note signing to patient read. Results Among 98,725 patient visits, less than half (48.9%) had patient portal access, of which 13.7% read an open note. Access was less likely in patients who were under age 18 (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.11), older than 65 (0.82, 0.73 to 0.93), Black non-Hispanic (0.66, 0.61 to 0.73), non-English speakers, and on public insurance. Patients were less likely to read open notes if they identified as Black non-Hispanic (0.61, 0.57 to 0.66), spoke Spanish (0.70, 0.60 to 0.81), or were on public insurance. Conclusion We identified substantial differences in digital access to clinical notes as well as patient utilization of open notes in a large, diverse sample. Health transparency initiatives must address not only technology adoption broadly but also the unique barriers faced by populations experiencing disadvantage to facilitate equitable access to and awareness about digital health tools without the unintended consequence of expanding disparities.

Study objective Our institution experienced a change in SARS-CoV-2 testing policy as well as substantial changes in local COVID-19 prevalence, allowing for a unique examination of the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 testing and emergency department (ED) length of stay. Methods This was an observational interrupted time series of all patients admitted to an academic health system between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2020. Given testing limitations from March 15 to April 24, all patients receiving SARS-CoV-2 tests were symptomatic. On April 24, testing was expanded to all ED admissions. The primary and secondary outcomes were ED length of stay and number needed to test to obtain a positive, respectively. Results A total of 70,856 patients were cared for in the EDs during the 7-month period. The testing change increased admission length of stay by 1.89 hours (95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.38). The number needed to test was 2.5 patients and was highest yield on April 1, 2020, when the state positivity rate was 39.7%; however, the number needed to test exceeded 170 patients by Sept 1, 2020, at which point the state positivity rate was 0.5%. Conclusion Although universal SARS-CoV-2 testing of ED admissions may meaningfully support mitigation and containment efforts, the clinical cost of testing all admissions amid low community positivity is notable. In our system, universal ED SARS-CoV-2 testing was associated with a 24% increase in admission length of stay alongside the detection of only 1 positive case every other day. Given the known harms and risks of ED boarding and crowding, solutions must be developed to support regular operational flow while balancing infection prevention needs.