Search

Objectives Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being increasingly incorporated into health care. However, few studies have evaluated users' expectations of such tools, prior to implementation, specifically in an underserved setting. Methods We conducted a qualitative research study employing semistructured interviews of physicians at The Instituto do Câncer do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil. The interview guide focused on anticipated, perceived benefits and challenges of using an AI-based clinical decision support system tool, Watson for Oncology. We recruited physician oncologists, working full or part-time, without prior experience with any AI-based tool. The interviews were taped and transcribed in Portuguese and then translated into English. Thematic analysis using the constant comparative approach was performed. Results Eleven oncologists participated in the study. The following overarching themes and subthemes emerged from the analysis of interview transcripts: theme-1, “general context” including (1) current setting, workload, and patient population and (2) existing challenges in cancer treatment, and theme-2, “perceptions around the potential use of an AI-based tool,” including (1) perceived benefits and (2) perceived challenges. Physicians expected that the implementation of an AI-based tool would result in easy access to the latest clinical recommendations, facilitate standardized cancer care, and allow it to be delivered with greater confidence and efficiency. Participants had several concerns such as availability of innovative treatments in resource-poor settings, treatment acceptance, trust, physician autonomy, and workflow disruptions. Conclusion This study provides physicians' anticipated perspectives, both benefits and challenges, about the use of an AI-based tool in cancer treatment in a resource-limited setting.

Objective To describe a user-centered approach to develop, pilot test, and refine requirements for 3 electronic health record (EHR)-integrated interventions that target key diagnostic process failures in hospitalized patients. Materials and Methods Three interventions were prioritized for development: a Diagnostic Safety Column (DSC) within an EHR-integrated dashboard to identify at-risk patients; a Diagnostic Time-Out (DTO) for clinicians to reassess the working diagnosis; and a Patient Diagnosis Questionnaire (PDQ) to gather patient concerns about the diagnostic process. Initial requirements were refined from analysis of test cases with elevated risk predicted by DSC logic compared to risk perceived by a clinician working group; DTO testing sessions with clinicians; PDQ responses from patients; and focus groups with clinicians and patient advisors using storyboarding to model the integrated interventions. Mixed methods analysis of participant responses was used to identify final requirements and potential implementation barriers. Results Final requirements from analysis of 10 test cases predicted by the DSC, 18 clinician DTO participants, and 39 PDQ responses included the following: DSC configurable parameters (variables, weights) to adjust baseline risk estimates in real-time based on new clinical data collected during hospitalization; more concise DTO wording and flexibility for clinicians to conduct the DTO with or without the patient present; and integration of PDQ responses into the DSC to ensure closed-looped communication with clinicians. Analysis of focus groups confirmed that tight integration of the interventions with the EHR would be necessary to prompt clinicians to reconsider the working diagnosis in cases with elevated diagnostic error (DE) risk or uncertainty. Potential implementation barriers included alert fatigue and distrust of the risk algorithm (DSC); time constraints, redundancies, and concerns about disclosing uncertainty to patients (DTO); and patient disagreement with the care team’s diagnosis (PDQ). Discussion A user-centered approach led to evolution of requirements for 3 interventions targeting key diagnostic process failures in hospitalized patients at risk for DE. Conclusions We identify challenges and offer lessons from our user-centered design process.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., OBJECTIVES: Access to personal health records in an ICU by persons involved in the patient’s care (referred to broadly as “family members” below) has the potential to increase engagement and reduce the negative psychologic sequelae of such hospitalizations. Currently, little is known about patient preferences for information sharing with a designated family member in the ICU. We sought to understand the information-sharing preferences of former ICU patients and their family members and to identify predictors of information-sharing preferences. DESIGN: We performed an internet survey that was developed by a broad, multidisciplinary team of stakeholders. Formal pilot testing of the survey was conducted prior to internet survey administration to study subjects. SETTING: Internet survey. Subjects: Subjects included English-speaking adults who had an ICU experience or a family member with ICU experience between 2013 and 2016. We used panel sampling to ensure an ethnically representative sample of the U.S. population. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One thousand five hundred twenty surveys were submitted, and 1,470 were included in analysis. The majority of respondents (93.6%) stated that they would want to share present and past medical history, either all or that related to their ICU stay, with a designated family member of their choosing. The majority (79%) would also want their designated family member to be able to access that information from a home computer. Although most respondents preferred to share all types of information, they indicated varying levels of willingness to share specific types of more sensitive information. Information-sharing preferences did not differ by age, sex, ethnicity, or type of prior experience in the ICU (i.e., patient or family member). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of an ICU admission, sharing personal health information with a person of the patient’s choosing appears desirable for most patients and family members. Policies and implementation of regulations should take this into consideration.

Background Preventable adverse events continue to be a threat to hospitalized patients. Clinical decision support in the form of dashboards may improve compliance with evidence-based safety practices. However, limited research describes providers' experiences with dashboards integrated into vendor electronic health record (EHR) systems. Objective This study was aimed to describe providers' use and perceived usability of the Patient Safety Dashboard and discuss barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods The Patient Safety Dashboard was implemented in a cluster-randomized stepped wedge trial on 12 units in neurology, oncology, and general medicine services over an 18-month period. Use of the Dashboard was tracked during the implementation period and analyzed in-depth for two 1-week periods to gather a detailed representation of use. Providers' perceptions of tool usability were measured using the Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (rated 1–5). Research assistants conducted field observations throughout the duration of the study to describe use and provide insight into tool adoption. Results The Dashboard was used 70% of days the tool was available, with use varying by role, service, and time of day. On general medicine units, nurses logged in throughout the day, with many logins occurring during morning rounds, when not rounding with the care team. Prescribers logged in typically before and after morning rounds. On neurology units, physician assistants accounted for most logins, accessing the Dashboard during daily brief interdisciplinary rounding sessions. Use on oncology units was rare. Satisfaction with the tool was highest for perceived ease of use, with attendings giving the highest rating (4.23). The overall lowest rating was for quality of work life, with nurses rating the tool lowest (2.88). Conclusion This mixed methods analysis provides insight into the use and usability of a dashboard tool integrated within a vendor EHR and can guide future improvements and more successful implementation of these types of tools.

IntroductionYouth with brain-based disabilities (BBDs), as well as their parents/caregivers, often feel ill-prepared for the transfer from paediatric to adult healthcare services. To address this pressing issue, we developed the MyREADY TransitionTM BBD App, a patient-facing e-health intervention. The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to determine whether the App will result in greater transition readiness compared with usual care for youth with BBD. Secondary aims included exploring the contextual experiences of youth using the App, as well as the interactive processes of youth, their parents/caregivers and healthcare providers around use of the intervention.Methods and analysisWe aimed to randomise 264 youth with BBD between 15 and 17 years of age, to receive existing services/usual care (control group) or to receive usual care along with the App (intervention group). Our recruitment strategy includes remote and virtual options in response to the current requirements for physical distancing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We will use an embedded experimental model design which involves embedding a qualitative study within a RCT. The Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire will be administered as the primary outcome measure. Analysis of covariance will be used to compare change in the two groups on the primary outcome measure; analysis will be intention-to-treat. Interviews will be conducted with subsets of youth in the intervention group, as well as parents/caregivers and healthcare providers.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the research ethics board of each participating site in four different regions in Canada. We will leverage our patient and family partnerships to find novel dissemination strategies. Study findings will be shared with the academic and stakeholder community, including dissemination of teaching and training tools through patient associations, and patient and family advocacy groups.Trial registration numberNCT03852550.

Objectives We describe an approach for analyzing failures in diagnostic processes in a small, enriched cohort of general medicine patients who expired during hospitalization and experienced medical error. Our objective was to delineate a systematic strategy for identifying frequent and significant failures in the diagnostic process to inform strategies for preventing adverse events due to diagnostic error. Methods Two clinicians independently reviewed detailed records of purposively sampled cases identified from established institutional case review forums and assessed the likelihood of diagnostic error using the Safer Dx instrument. Each reviewer used the modified Diagnostic Error Evaluation and Research (DEER) taxonomy, revised for acute care (41 possible failure points across six process dimensions), to characterize the frequency of failure points (FPs) and significant FPs in the diagnostic process. Results Of 166 cases with medical error, 16 were sampled: 13 (81.3%) had one or more diagnostic error(s), and a total of 113 FPs and 30 significant FPs were identified. A majority of significant FPs (63.3%) occurred in “Diagnostic Information and Patient Follow-up” and “Patient and Provider Encounter and Initial Assessment” process dimensions. Fourteen (87.5%) cases had a significant FP in at least one of these dimensions. Conclusions Failures in the diagnostic process occurred across multiple dimensions in our purposively sampled cohort. A systematic analytic approach incorporating the modified DEER taxonomy, revised for acute care, offered critical insights into key failures in the diagnostic process that could serve as potential targets for preventative interventions.

IMPORTANCE: Online programs may help with weight loss but have not been widely implemented in routine primary care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a combined intervention, including an online weight management program plus population health management, with the online program only and with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cluster randomized trial with enrollment from July 19, 2016, through August 10, 2017, at 15 primary care practices in the US. Eligible participants had a scheduled primary care visit and were aged 20 to 70 years, had a body mass index between 27 and less than 40, and had a diagnosis of hypertension or type 2 diabetes. Follow-up ended on May 8, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the usual care group (n = 326) were mailed general information about weight management. Participants in the online program only group (n = 216) and the combined intervention group (n = 298) were registered for the online program. The participants in the combined intervention group also received weight-related population health management, which included additional support from nonclinical staff who monitored their progress in the online program and conducted periodic outreach. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was weight change at 12 months based on measured weights recorded in the electronic health record. Weight change at 18 months was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Among the 840 participants who enrolled (mean age, 59.3 years [SD, 8.6 years]; 60% female; 76.8% White), 732 (87.1%) had a recorded weight at 12 months and the missing weights for the remaining participants were imputed. There was a significant difference in weight change at 12 months by group with a mean weight change of –1.2 kg (95% CI, –2.1 to –0.3 kg) in the usual care group, –1.9 kg (95% CI, –2.6 to –1.1 kg) in the online program only group, and –3.1 kg (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.5 kg) in the combined intervention group (P

Objective Many options are currently available for sepsis surveillance clinical decision support (CDS) from electronic medical record (EMR) vendors, third party, and homegrown models drawing on rule-based (RB) and machine learning (ML) algorithms. This study explores sepsis CDS implementation from the perspective of implementation leads by describing the motivations, tool choices, and implementation experiences of a diverse group of implementers. Materials and Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with and a questionnaire was administered to 21 hospital leaders overseeing CDS implementation at 15 US medical centers. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling. Responses were coded by 2 coders with consensus approach and inductively analyzed for themes. Results Use of sepsis CDS is motivated in part by quality metrics for sepsis patients. Choice of tool is driven by ease of integration, customization capability, and perceived predictive potential. Implementation processes for these CDS tools are complex, time-consuming, interdisciplinary undertakings resulting in heterogeneous choice of tools and workflow integration. To improve clinician acceptance, implementers addressed both optimization of the alerts as well as clinician understanding and buy in. More distrust and confusion was reported for ML models, as compared to RB models. Respondents described a variety of approaches to overcome implementation barriers; these approaches related to alert firing, content, integration, and buy-in. Discussion While there are shared socio-technical challenges of implementing CDS for both RB and ML models, attention to user education, support, expectation management, and dissemination of effective practices may improve feasibility and effectiveness of ML models in quality improvement efforts. Conclusion Further implementation science research is needed to determine real world efficacy of these tools. Clinician acceptance is a significant barrier to sepsis CDS implementation. Successful implementation of less clinically intuitive ML models may require additional attention to user confusion and distrust.

Background Most health care organizations' efforts to reduce harm focus on physical harm, but other forms of harm are both prevalent and important. These "nonphysical" harms can be framed using the concepts of respect and dignity: Disrespect is an affront to dignity and can cause harm. Organizations should strive to eliminate disrespect to patients, to families, and among health care professionals. Methods A diverse, interdisciplinary panel of experts was convened to discuss strategies to guide health care systems to embrace an expanded definition of patient harm that includes nonphysical harm. Subsequently, using a modified Delphi process, a guide was developed for health care professionals and organizations to improve the practice of respect across the continuum of care. Results Five rounds of surveys were required to reach predefined metrics of consensus. Delphi participants identified a total of 25 strategies associated with six high-level recommendations: "Leaders must champion a culture of respect and dignity"; with other professionals sharing the responsibility to "Promote accountability"; "Engage and support the health care workforce"; "Partner with patients and families"; "Establish systems to learn about and improve the practice of respect"; and "Expand the research agenda and measurement tools, and disseminate what is learned." Conclusion Harm from disrespect is the next frontier in preventable harm. This consensus statement provides a road map for health care organizations and professionals interested in engaging in a reliable practice of respect. Further work is needed to develop the specific tactics that will lead health care organizations to prevent harm from disrespect.

Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) is becoming increasingly common. However, there is little evidence regarding what novel ethical challenges, if any, are posed by PCOR with relevance to institutional review board (IRB) oversight and human subjects protections. This article reports the results of a national survey of all IRB chairpersons from research-intensive institutions in the United States. Findings address the responsibilities of IRBs and the challenges associated with PCOR review and oversight. IRB chairpersons varied in their judgment of PCOR’s overall value to the scientific enterprise and to research at their institution. Furthermore, 27% of respondents considered patients serving in nontraditional roles to be research subjects even when they are not enrolled in research. There was also variation in the training and safeguards their IRBs require for patient partners. Our results suggest that guidance should be developed around ethical and regulatory issues associated with PCOR oversight.

ObjectiveThe objective of this paper is to share challenges, recommendations, and lessons learned regarding the development and implementation of a Patient Safety Learning Laboratory (PSLL) project, an innovative and complex intervention comprised of a suite of Health Information Technology (HIT) tools integrated with a newly implemented Electronic Health Record (EHR) vendor system in the acute care setting at a large academic center.Materials and MethodsThe PSLL Administrative Core engaged stakeholders and study personnel throughout all phases of the project: problem analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. Implementation challenges and recommendations were derived from direct observations and the collective experience of PSLL study personnel.ResultsThe PSLL intervention was implemented on 12 inpatient units during the 18-month study period, potentially impacting 12,628 patient admissions. Challenges to implementation included stakeholder engagement, project scope/complexity, technology/governance, and team structure. Recommendations to address each of these challenges were generated, some enacted during the trial, others as lessons learned for future iterative refinements of the intervention and its implementation.ConclusionDesigning, implementing, and evaluating a suite of tools integrated within a vendor EHR to improve patient safety has a variety of challenges. Keys to success include continuous stakeholder engagement, involvement of systems and human factors engineers within a multidisciplinary team, an iterative approach to user-centered design, and a willingness to think outside of current workflows and processes to change health system culture around adverse event prevention.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) often take the lead role in caring for patients with overweight and obesity; however, few PCPs counsel patients about weight loss. Online weight management programs that are integrated within primary care may help address this gap in care. OBJECTIVE: To identify perceptions of and experience with online weight management programs in general and with a proposed online program, to identify barriers to use, and to improve the design and content of our intervention, which included an online program plus population health management (PHM) support from primary care practices. DESIGN: A mixed qualitative methods study including three patient focus groups and seven semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 13 adult patients (age range, 20–70) with body mass index (BMI) 27–35 kg/m(2) attended the focus groups. In-person semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven healthcare providers (three PCPs, two population health managers, one primary care nurse, and one registered dietitian). MAIN MEASURES: We developed and used semi-structured focus groups and interview guides. The focus group and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Using grounded theory, we analyzed the transcripts to identify and extract common concepts and themes. KEY RESULTS: Although patients and healthcare providers expressed positive opinions about online weight management programs, few patients had experience with them, and providers stated that such programs are not being widely implemented in primary care settings. Some participants highlighted the flexibility and low cost as strengths of online weight management tools compared with in-person programs. All participants had favorable opinions about our proposed intervention and were overwhelmingly positive about the combination of an online program and PHM support. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential value of online weight management programs and PHM support in primary care. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02656693.

Objective: The study objective was to evaluate the accuracy, validity, and clinical usefulness of medication error alerts generated by an alerting system using outlier detection screening. Materials and Methods: Five years of clinical data were extracted from an electronic health record system for 747 985 patients who had at least one visit during 2012–2013 at practices affiliated with 2 academic medical centers. Data were screened using the system to detect outliers suggestive of potential medication errors. A sample of 300 charts was selected for review from the 15 693 alerts generated. A coding system was developed and codes assigned based on chart review to reflect the accuracy, validity, and clinical value of the alerts. Results: Three-quarters of the chart-reviewed alerts generated by the screening system were found to be valid in which potential medication errors were identified. Of these valid alerts, the majority (75.0%) were found to be clinically useful in flagging potential medication errors or issues. Discussion: A clinical decision support (CDS) system that used a probabilistic, machine-learning approach based on statistically derived outliers to detect medication errors generated potentially useful alerts with a modest rate of false positives. The performance of such a surveillance and alerting system is critically dependent on the quality and completeness of the underlying data. Conclusion: The screening system was able to generate alerts that might otherwise be missed with existing CDS systems and did so with a reasonably high degree of alert usefulness when subjected to review of patients’ clinical contexts and details.

Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) may lack decisional capacity and may depend on proxy decision makers (PDMs) to make medical decisions on their behalf. High-quality information-sharing with PDMs, including through such means as health information technology, could improve communication and decision making and could potentially minimize the psychological consequences of an ICU stay for both patients and their family members. However, alongside these anticipated benefits of information-sharing are risks of unwanted disclosure of sensitive information. Approaches to identifying the optimal balance between access to digital health information to facilitate engagement and protecting patient privacy are urgently needed. We identified eight themes that should be considered in balancing health information access and patient privacy: 1) potential benefits to patients from PDM data access; 2) potential harms to patients from such access; 3) the moral status of families within the patient-clinician relationship; 4) the scope of relevant information provided to PDMs; 5) issues around defining PDMs’ authority; 6) methods for eliciting and documenting patient preferences about their family’s information access; 7) the relevance of methods for ascertaining the identity of PDMs; and 8) the obligations of hospitals to prevent privacy breaches by PDMs. We conclude that PDMs should typically have access to health information from the current episode of care when the patient is decisionally impaired, unless the patient has previously expressed a clear preference that PDMs not have such access.

BackgroundThe majority of U.S hospitals have implemented electronic health records (EHRs). While the benefits of EHRs have been widely touted, little is known about their effects on inpatient care, including how well they meet workflow needs and support care.ObjectiveAssess the extent to which EHRs support care team workflow during hospital morning rounds.DesignWe applied a mixed-method approach including observations of care teams during morning rounds, semi-structured interviews and an electronic survey of hospital inpatient clinicians. Structured field notes taken during observations were used to identify workflow patterns for analysis. We applied a grounded theory approach to extract emerging themes from interview transcripts and used SPSS Statistics 24 to analyze survey responses.SettingMedical units at a major teaching hospital in New England.ResultsData triangulation across the three analyses yielded four main findings: (1) a high degree of variance in the ways care teams use EHRs during morning rounds. (2) Pervasive use of workarounds at critical points of care (3) EHRs are not used for information sharing and frequently impede intra-care team communication. (4) System design and hospital room settings do not adequately support care team workflow.ConclusionsGaps between EHR design and the functionality needed in the complex inpatient environment result in lack of standardized workflows, extensive use of workarounds and team communication issues. These issues pose a threat to patient safety and quality of care. Possible solutions need to include improvements in EHR design, care team training and changes to the hospital room setting.

Importance Burnout negatively affects physician health, productivity, and patient care. Its prevalence is high among physicians, especially those in primary care, yet few qualitative studies of burnout have been performed that engage frontline primary care practitioners (PCPs) for their perspectives. Objective To identify factors contributing to burnout and low professional fulfillment, as well as potential solutions, by eliciting the views of PCPs. Design, Setting, and Participants For this qualitative study, focus group discussions and interviews were conducted between February 1 and April 30, 2018, among 26 PCPs (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) at a US academic medical center with a network of 15 primary care clinics. Participants were asked about factors contributing to burnout and barriers to professional fulfillment as well as potential solutions related to workplace culture and efficiency, work-life balance, and resilience. Main Outcomes and Measures Perceptions of the factors contributing to burnout and low professional fulfillment as well as potential solutions. Results A total of 26 PCPs (21 physicians, 3 nurse practitioners, and 2 physician assistants; 21 [81%] women) from 10 primary care clinics participated. They had a mean (SD) of 19.4 (9.5) years of clinical experience. Six common themes emerged from PCPs’ experiences with burnout: 3 external contributing factors and 3 internal manifestations. Participants described their workloads as excessively heavy, increasingly involving less “doctor” work and more “office” work, and reflecting unreasonable expectations. They felt demoralized by work conditions, undervalued by local institutions and the health care system, and conflicted in their daily work. Participants conveyed a sense of professional dissonance, or discomfort from working in a system that seems to hold values counter to their values as clinicians. They suggested potential solutions clustered around 8 themes: managing the workload, caring for PCPs as multidimensional human beings, disconnecting from work, recalibrating expectations and reimbursement levels, promoting PCPs’ voice, supporting professionalism, fostering community, and advocating reforms beyond the institution. Conclusions and Relevance In sharing their perspectives on factors contributing to burnout, frontline PCPs interviewed during this study described dissonance between their professional values and the realities of primary care practice, an authority-responsibility mismatch, and a sense of undervaluation. Practitioners also identified possible solutions institutions might consider investing in to resolve professional dissonance, reduce burnout rates, and improve professional fulfillment.

We implemented a web-based, patient-centered toolkit that engages patients/caregivers in the hospital plan of care by facilitating education and patient-provider communication. Of the 585 eligible patients approached on medical intensive care and oncology units, 239 were enrolled (119 patients, 120 caregivers). The most common reason for not approaching the patient was our inability to identify a health care proxy when a patient was incapacitated. Significantly more caregivers were enrolled in medical intensive care units compared with oncology units (75% vs 32%; P < .01). Of the 239 patient/caregivers, 158 (66%) and 97 (41%) inputted a daily and overall goal, respectively. Use of educational content was highest for medications and test results and infrequent for problems. The most common clinical theme identified in 291 messages sent by 158 patients/caregivers was health concerns, needs, preferences, or questions (19%, 55 of 291). The average system usability scores and satisfaction ratings of a sample of surveyed enrollees were favorable. From analysis of feedback, we identified barriers to adoption and outlined strategies to promote use.

Although "respect" and "dignity" are intuitive concepts, little formal work has addressed their systematic application in the ICU setting. After convening a multidisciplinary group of relevant experts, we undertook a review of relevant literature and collaborative discussions focused on the practice of respect in the ICU. We report the output of this process, including a summary of current knowledge, a conceptual framework, and a research program for understanding and improving the practice of respect and dignity in the ICU. We separate our report into findings and proposals. Findings include the following: 1) dignity and respect are interrelated; 2) ICU patients and families are vulnerable to disrespect; 3) violations of respect and dignity appear to be common in the ICU and overlap substantially with dehumanization; 4) disrespect may be associated with both primary and secondary harms; and 5) systemic barriers complicate understanding and the reliable practice of respect in the ICU. Proposals include: 1) initiating and/or expanding a field of research on the practice of respect in the ICU; 2) treating "failures of respect" as analogous to patient safety events and using existing quality and safety mechanisms for improvement; and 3) identifying both benefits and potential unintended consequences of efforts to improve the practice of respect. Respect and dignity are important considerations in the ICU, even as substantial additional research remains to be done.

Summary Objectives: Our goal was to identify and track the evolution of the topics discussed in free-text comments on a cancer institution’s social media page. Methods: We utilized the Latent Dirichlet Allocation model to extract ten topics from free-text comments on a cancer research institution’s Facebook™ page between January 1, 2009, and June 30, 2014. We calculated Pearson correlation coefficients between the comment categories to demonstrate topic intensity evolution. Results: A total of 4,335 comments were included in this study, from which ten topics were identified: greetings (17.3%), comments about the cancer institution (16.7%), blessings (10.9%), time (10.7%), treatment (9.3%), expressions of optimism (7.9%), tumor (7.5%), father figure (6.3%), and other family members & friends (8.2%), leaving 5.1% of comments unclassified. The comment distributions reveal an overall increasing trend during the study period. We discovered a strong positive correlation between greetings and other family members & friends (r=0.88; p Conclusions: A cancer institution’s social media platform can provide emotional support to patients and family members. Topic analysis may help institutions better identify and support the needs (emotional, instrumental, and social) of their community and influence their social media strategy.Citation: Tang C, Zhou L, Plasek J, Rozenblum R, Bates D. Comment Topic Evolution on a Cancer Institution’s Facebook Page. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8: 854–865 https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2017-04-RA-0055

As part of an interdisciplinary acute care patient portal task force with members from 10 academic medical centers and professional organizations, we held a national workshop with 71 attendees representing over 30 health systems, professional organizations, and technology companies. Our consensus approach identified 7 key sociotechnical and evaluation research focus areas related to the consumption and capture of information from patients, care partners (eg, family, friends), and clinicians through portals in the acute and post-acute care settings. The 7 research areas were: (1) standards, (2) privacy and security, (3) user-centered design, (4) implementation, (5) data and content, (6) clinical decision support, and (7) measurement. Patient portals are not yet in routine use in the acute and post-acute setting, and research focused on the identified domains should increase the likelihood that they will deliver benefit, especially as there are differences between needs in acute and post-acute care compared to the ambulatory setting.

Objective To investigate organizational strategies to promote personal health records (PHRs) adoption with a focus on patients with chronic disease. Methods Using semi-structured interviews and a web-based survey, we sampled US health delivery organizations which had implemented PHRs for at least 12 months, were recognized as PHR innovators, and had scored highly in national patient satisfaction surveys. Respondents had lead positions for clinical information systems or high-risk population management. Using grounded theory approach, thematic categories were derived from interviews and coupled with data from the survey. Results Interviews were conducted with 30 informants from 16 identified organizations. Organizational strategies were directed towards raising patient awareness via multimedia communications, and provider acceptance and uptake. Strategies for providers were grouped into six main themes: organizational vision, governance and policies, work process redesign, staff training, information technology (IT) support, and monitoring and incentives. Successful organizations actively communicated their vision, engaged leaders at all levels, had clear governance, planning, and protocols, set targets, and celebrated achievement. The most effective strategy for patient uptake was through health professional encouragement. No specific outreach efforts targeted patients with chronic disease. Registration and PHR activity was routinely measured but without reference to a denominator population or high risk subpopulations. Discussion and conclusion Successful PHR implementation represents a social change and operational project catalyzed by a technical solution. The key to clinician acceptance is making their work easier. However, organizations will likely not achieve the value they want from PHRs unless they target specific populations and monitor their uptake.

PURPOSE Shared medical appointments (SMAs) are becoming popular, but little is known about their association with patient experience in primary care. We performed an exploratory analysis examining overall satisfaction and patient-centered care experiences across key domains of the patient-centered medical home among patients attending SMAs vs usual care appointments. METHODS We undertook a cross-sectional study using a mailed questionnaire measuring levels of patient satisfaction and other indicators of patient-centered care among 921 SMA and 921 usual care patients between 2008 and 2010. Propensity scores adjusted for potential case mix differences between the groups. Multivariate logistic regression assessed propensity-matched patients’ ratings of care. Generalized estimating equations accounted for physician-level clustering. RESULTS A total of 40% of SMA patients and 31% of usual care patients responded. In adjusted analyses, SMA patients were more likely to rate their overall satisfaction with care as “very good” when compared with usual care counterparts (odds ratio = 1.26; 95% CI, 1.05–1.52). In the analysis of patient-centered medical home elements, SMA patients rated their care as more accessible and more sensitive to their needs, whereas usual care patients reported greater satisfaction with physician communication and time spent during their appointment. CONCLUSIONS Overall, SMA patients appear more satisfied with their care relative to patients receiving usual care. SMAs may also improve access to care and deliver care that patients find to be sensitive to their needs. Further research should focus on enhancing patient-clinician communication within an SMA as this model of care becomes more widely adopted.

Objectives Patient-centered care and patient satisfaction represent key dimensions of health care quality. This is relevant for the growing number of patients with life-long conditions. In the present study, our goal was to examine clinicians' attitudes and behavior with respect to patient satisfaction in adult congenital heart disease outpatient clinics. Methods A 34-question survey was developed to assess adult congenital heart disease clinicians' awareness, attitudes, and behavior relative to patient satisfaction and administered in-person or online to clinicians from the largely U.S.-based Adult Congenital Heart Association's database of adult congenital heart disease health care providers. Results Overall, 267 questionnaires were filled out: 108 were collected in person (79% response rate) and 159 online (17.5% response rate). Responses were received from physicians (161); nurses (73); physician assistants (20); and others (13). Although 85% of clinicians believed it was important to inquire about patient satisfaction, only 28% reported routinely inquiring about this dimension of care. Only 34% claimed they had adequate training to cope with varying levels of patient satisfaction, 44% stated that their department utilized patient satisfaction surveys, and 37% received feedback from the hospital management in the preceding 12 months. In multivariate analyses, clinicians that received feedback from the hospital management and had adequate training were more likely to inquire about patient satisfaction. Conclusion Although patient satisfaction is perceived as an important dimension of quality care by adult congenital heart disease clinicians, most of them reported insufficient institutional support to achieve this. Our findings suggest that clinicians would benefit from health care organizations engaging them in the delivery of this dimension of health care quality.

Purpose Patient satisfaction is increasingly recognized as an important component of quality. The expansion of health information technologies (HIT) might have an impact on patient satisfaction – either positively or negatively. We conducted a literature review to explore the impact of these technologies on patient satisfaction. Methods The database of PubMed was searched from inception through May 2010, using the MeSH terms "Medical Informatics" and "Patient Satisfaction". We included all original interventional studies regardless of their study design that were published in English and were evaluating HIT impact on patient satisfaction. Studies were categorized by technology type according to the American Medical Informatics Association framework and by study design. The major outcome of interest was the HIT impact on patient satisfaction. Results Of 1293 citations reviewed, 56 studies met our inclusion criteria. Design of these studies included mostly randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ( n =20, 36%), cross-sectional surveys ( n =17, 30%), and a pre and post studies ( n =14, 25%). Overall, 54% ( n =30) of the studies demonstrated a positive effect of HIT on patient satisfaction, 34% ( n =19) failed to show any effect, 11% ( n =6) had inconclusive results, and 2% ( n =1) revealed a negative effect. Of the 20 RCTs, 40% ( n =8) showed a positive effect of HIT on patient satisfaction, 50% ( n =10) failed to show any effect, and 10% (2) had inconclusive results. Conclusions Analysis suggested that while there is some evidence that HIT improves patient satisfaction, studies in this literature review, and in particularly RCTs, were not consistent in their findings. Although HIT may be a promising tool to improve patient satisfaction, more well-designed research studies are needed in order to get a better understanding of this domain and accordingly find new opportunities to improve quality of care.

Purpose: To achieve a high level of patient satisfaction, physicians need to identify and address patients' expectations. However, ophthalmologists' attitudes and behavior with respect to patient expectations and satisfaction are not well understood. Therefore, we undertook a study to examine ophthalmologists' attitudes, performance and major determinants of their behavior with respect to managing patient expectations in different settings: public hospitals and private clinics. Methods: The authors refined a previously validated questionnaire to assess ophthalmologists' attitudes and performance with respect to patient expectations and patient satisfaction in public hospitals and private clinics. The authors surveyed ophthalmologists at the Annual Conference of Ocular Microsurgery in Israel. Results: Overall, 164 ophthalmologists completed the survey (65.6% response rate), of which 24 (14.6%) were residents and 140 (85.4%) were attendings. Although all the ophthalmologists working at public hospitals believed that it is important to be attentive to patient expectations, only 41.2% reported that they sometimes or always inquire about their patients’ expectations; only 2% always asked patients about their expectations. Residents at public hospitals were more likely to ask than attendings (95.8% vs. 29.0%, p

Rising ownership of smartphones and tablets across social and demographic groups has made mobile applications, or apps, a potentially promising tool for engaging patients in their health care, particularly those with high health care needs. Through a systematic search of iOS (Apple) and Android app stores and an analysis of apps targeting individuals with chronic illnesses, we assessed the degree to which apps are likely to be useful in patient engagement efforts. Usefulness was determined based on the following criteria: description of engagement, relevance to the targeted patient population, consumer ratings and reviews, and most recent app update. Among the 1,046 health care-related, patient-facing applications identified by our search, 43 percent of iOS apps and 27 percent of Android apps appeared likely to be useful. We also developed criteria for evaluating the patient engagement, quality, and safety of mobile apps.

Objective To summarize the Canadian health information technology (HIT) policy experience and impart lessons learned to the US as it determines its policy in this area. Design Qualitative analysis of interviews with identified key stakeholders followed by an electronic survey. Measurements We conducted semi-structured interviews with 29 key Canadian HIT policy and opinion leaders and used a grounded theory approach to analyze the results. The informant sample was chosen to provide views from different stakeholder groups including national representatives and regional representatives from three Canadian provinces. Results Canadian informants believed that much of the current US direction is positive, especially regarding incentives and meaningful use, but that there are key opportunities for the US to emphasize direct engagement with providers, define a clear business case for them, sponsor large scale evaluations to assess HIT impact in a broad array of settings, determine standards but also enable access to resources needed for mid-course corrections of standards when issues are identified, and, finally, leverage implementation of digital imaging systems. Limitations Not all stakeholder groups were included, such as providers or patients. In addition, as in all qualitative research, a selection bias could be present due to the relatively small sample size. Conclusions Based on Canadian experience with HIT policy, stakeholders identified as lessons for the US the need to increase direct engagement with providers and the importance of defining the business case for HIT, which can be achieved through large scale evaluations, and of recognizing and leveraging successes as they emerge.

Background Patients routinely use Twitter to share feedback about their experience receiving healthcare. Identifying and analysing the content of posts sent to hospitals may provide a novel real-time measure of quality, supplementing traditional, survey-based approaches. Objective To assess the use of Twitter as a supplemental data stream for measuring patient-perceived quality of care in US hospitals and compare patient sentiments about hospitals with established quality measures. Design 404 065 tweets directed to 2349 US hospitals over a 1-year period were classified as having to do with patient experience using a machine learning approach. Sentiment was calculated for these tweets using natural language processing. 11 602 tweets were manually categorised into patient experience topics. Finally, hospitals with ≥50 patient experience tweets were surveyed to understand how they use Twitter to interact with patients. Key results Roughly half of the hospitals in the US have a presence on Twitter. Of the tweets directed toward these hospitals, 34 725 (9.4%) were related to patient experience and covered diverse topics. Analyses limited to hospitals with ≥50 patient experience tweets revealed that they were more active on Twitter, more likely to be below the national median of Medicare patients (p

SummaryBackground: Personal health records (PHRs) connected to a physician’s electronic health record system hold substantial promise for supporting and engaging patients with chronic disease. Objectives: To explore how U.S. health care organizations are currently utilizing PHRs for chronic disease populations.Methods: A mixed methods study including semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire was conducted. A purposive sample was developed of health care organizations which were recognized as exemplars for PHRs and were high performers in national patient satisfaction surveys (H-CAHPS or CAHPS). Within each organization, participants were health IT leaders or those managing high-risk or chronic disease populations.Results: Interviews were conducted with 30 informants and completed questionnaires were received from 16 organizations (84% response rate). Most PHRs allowed patients to access health records and educational material, message their provider, renew prescriptions and request appointments. Patient generated data was increasingly being sought and combined with messaging, resulted in greater understanding of patient health and functioning outside of the clinic visit. However for chronic disease populations, there was little targeted involvement in PHR design and few tools to help interpret and manage their conditions beyond those offered for all. The PHR was largely uncoupled from high risk population management interventions and no clear framework for future PHR development emerged.Conclusion: This technology is currently underutilized and represents a major opportunity given the potential benefits of patient engagement and shared decision making. A coherent patient-centric PHR design and evaluation strategy is required to realize its potential and maximize this natural hub for multidisciplinary care co-ordination.Citation: Wells S, Rozenblum R, Park A, Dunn M, Bates DW. Personal health records for patients with chronic disease: A major opportunity. Appl Clin Inf 2014; 5: 416–429 http://dx.doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2014-01-RA-0002

Patient-centered care and patient satisfaction represent key dimensions of health care quality. This is relevant for the growing number of patients with life-long conditions. In the present study, our goal was to examine clinicians' attitudes and behavior with respect to patient satisfaction in adult congenital heart disease outpatient clinics.A 34-question survey was developed to assess adult congenital heart disease clinicians' awareness, attitudes, and behavior relative to patient satisfaction and administered in-person or online to clinicians from the largely U.S.-based Adult Congenital Heart Association's database of adult congenital heart disease health care providers.Overall, 267 questionnaires were filled out: 108 were collected in person (79% response rate) and 159 online (17.5% response rate). Responses were received from physicians (161); nurses (73); physician assistants (20); and others (13). Although 85% of clinicians believed it was important to inquire about patient satisfaction, only 28% reported routinely inquiring about this dimension of care. Only 34% claimed they had adequate training to cope with varying levels of patient satisfaction, 44% stated that their department utilized patient satisfaction surveys, and 37% received feedback from the hospital management in the preceding 12 months. In multivariate analyses, clinicians that received feedback from the hospital management and had adequate training were more likely to inquire about patient satisfaction.Although patient satisfaction is perceived as an important dimension of quality care by adult congenital heart disease clinicians, most of them reported insufficient institutional support to achieve this. Our findings suggest that clinicians would benefit from health care organizations engaging them in the delivery of this dimension of health care quality.

Patient-centered care has become an increasing priority in the United States and plays a prominent role in recent healthcare reforms. One way the country has managed to advance patient-centered care is through establishment of a family of national patient experience surveys (the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Plans (CAHPS). CAHPS is publicly reported for several types of providers and was recently tied to hospital reimbursement. This is part of a trend over the last two decades that has shifted provider-patient relationships from a traditional paternal approach to customer service and then to clinical partnership. The health care system in Israel, however, is still struggling to overcome barriers to change in this area. While community based biannual patient experience surveys are conducted by the Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute, there is no comprehensive national approach to measuring the patient experience across a broad range of settings. Only recently did the Israeli Ministry of Health take its first steps to include patient experience as a dimension of health care quality. In its current position, Israel should learn from the U.S. experience with policies promoting patient-centered care, and specifically the impact on clinical services of measuring the patient experience. Looking at what has happened in the United States, we suggest three main lessons. First, there is a need for a set of national patient experience surveys that would be publicly reported and eventually tied to provider reimbursement. Secondly, the national survey tools should be customized to the unique characteristics of Israeli society and draw from recent research on patient-centeredness to include new and important domains such as patient activation and shared decision-making. Finally, newer technological approaches should be explored with the aim of increasing response rates and the timeliness and usefulness of the surveys.

Patients are central to healthcare delivery, yet all too often their perspectives and input have not been considered by providers.1 ,2 This is beginning to change rapidly and is having a major impact across a range of dimensions. Patients are becoming more engaged in their care and patient-centred healthcare has emerged as a major domain of quality.3–6 At the same time, social media in particular and the internet more broadly are widely recognised as having produced huge effects across societies. For example, few would have predicted the Arab Spring, yet it was clearly enabled by media such as Facebook and Twitter. Now these technologies are beginning to pervade the healthcare space, just as they have so many others. But what will their effects be? These three domains—patient-centred healthcare, social media and the internet—are beginning to come together, with powerful and unpredictable consequences. We believe that they have the potential to create a major shift in how patients and healthcare organisations connect, in effect, the ‘perfect storm’, a phrase that has been used to describe a situation in which a rare combination of circumstances result in an event of unusual magnitude creating the potential for non-linear change.7 Historically, patients have paid relatively little attention to quality, safety and the experiences large groups of other patients have had, and have made choices about where to get healthcare based largely on factors like reputation, the recommendations of a friend or proximity.8 Part of the reason for this was that information about quality or the opinions of others about their care was hard to access before the internet. Today, patients appear to be becoming more engaged with their care in general, and one of the many results is that they are increasingly using the internet to share and rate …

Background: Self-management is essential to caring for high-need, high-cost (HNHC) populations. Advances in mobile phone technology coupled with increased availability and adoption of health-focused mobile apps have made self-management more achievable, but the extent and quality of the literature supporting their use is not well defined. Objective: The purpose of this review was to assess the breadth, quality, bias, and types of outcomes measured in the literature supporting the use of apps targeting HNHC populations. Methods: Data sources included articles in PubMed and MEDLINE (National Center for Biotechnology Information), EMBASE (Elsevier), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (EBSCO), Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), and the NTIS (National Technical Information Service) Bibliographic Database (EBSCO) published since 2008. We selected studies involving use of patient-facing iOS or Android mobile health apps. Extraction was performed by 1 reviewer; 40 randomly selected articles were evaluated by 2 reviewers to assess agreement. Results: Our final analysis included 175 studies. The populations most commonly targeted by apps included patients with obesity, physical handicaps, diabetes, older age, and dementia. Only 30.3% (53/175) of the apps studied in the reviewed literature were identifiable and available to the public through app stores. Many of the studies were cross-sectional analyses (42.9%, 75/175), small (median number of participants=31, interquartile range 11.0-207.2, maximum 11,690), or performed by an app’s developers (61.1%, 107/175). Of the 175 studies, only 36 (20.6%, 36/175) studies evaluated a clinical outcome. Conclusions: Most apps described in the literature could not be located on the iOS or Android app stores, and existing research does not robustly evaluate the potential of mobile apps. Whereas apps may be useful in patients with chronic conditions, data do not support this yet. Although we had 2-3 reviewers to screen and assess abstract eligibility, only 1 reviewer abstracted the data. This is one limitation of our study. With respect to the 40 articles (22.9%, 40/175) that were assigned to 2 reviewers (of which 3 articles were excluded), inter-rater agreement was significant on the majority of items (17 of 30) but fair-to-moderate on others. [JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2016;4(4):e136]