Search

OBJECTIVE: The research evaluated strategies for facilitating physician adoption of an evidence-based medicine literature request feature recently integrated into an existing electronic medical record (EMR) system. METHODS: This prospective study explored use of the service by 137 primary care physicians by using service usage statistics and focus group and survey components. The frequency of physicians' requests for literature via the EMR during a 10-month period was examined to explore the impact of several enhanced communication strategies launched mid-way through the observation period. A focus group and a 25-item survey explored physicians' experiences with the service. RESULTS: There was no detectable difference in the proportion of physicians utilizing the service after implementation of the customized communication strategies (11% in each time period, P=1.0, McNemar's test). Forty-eight physicians (35%) responded to the survey. Respondents who had used the service (n=19) indicated that information provided through the service was highly relevant to clinical practice (mean rating 4.6, scale 1 'not relevant'-5 'highly relevant'), and most (n=15) reported sharing the information with colleagues. CONCLUSION: The enhanced communication strategies, though well received, did not significantly affect use of the service. However, physicians noted the relevance and utility of librarian-summarized evidence from the literature, highlighting the potential benefits of providing expert librarian services in clinical workflow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Evaluations of individual terminology systems should be driven in part by the intended usages of such systems. Clinical interface terminologies support interactions between healthcare providers and computer-based applications. They aid practitioners in converting clinical "free text" thoughts into the structured, formal data representations used internally by application programs. Interface terminologies also serve the important role of presenting existing stored, encoded data to end users in human-understandable and actionable formats. The authors present a model for evaluating functional utility of interface terminologies based on these intended uses.Design: Specific parameters defined in the manuscript comprise the metrics for the evaluation model.Measurements: Parameters include concept accuracy, term expressivity, degree of semantic consistency for term construction and selection, adequacy of assertional knowledge supporting concepts, degree of complexity of pre-coordinated concepts, and the "human readability" of the terminology. The fundamental metric is how well the interface terminology performs in supporting correct, complete, and efficient data encoding or review by humans.Results: Authors provide examples demonstrating performance of the proposed evaluation model in selected instances.Conclusion: A formal evaluation model will permit investigators to evaluate interface terminologies using a consistent and principled approach. Terminology developers and evaluators can apply the proposed model to identify areas for improving interface terminologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electronic health record (EHR) systems are increasingly being adopted in pediatric practices; however, requirements for integrated growth charts are poorly described and are not standardized in current systems. The authors integrated growth chart functionality into an EHR system being developed and installed in a multispecialty pediatric clinic in an academic medical center. During a three-year observation period, rates of electronically documented values for weight, stature, and head circumference increased from fewer than ten total per weekday, up to 488 weight values, 293 stature values, and 74 head circumference values (p<0.001 for each measure). By the end of the observation period, users accessed the growth charts an average 175 times per weekday, compared to 127 patient visits per weekday to the sites that most closely monitored pediatric growth. Because EHR systems and integrated growth charts can manipulate data, perform calculations, and adapt to user preferences and patient characteristics, users may expect greater functionality from electronic growth charts than from paper-based growth charts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous investigators have defined clinical interface terminology as a systematic collection of health care-related phrases (terms) that supports clinicians' entry of patient-related information into computer programs, such as clinical "note capture" and decision support tools. Interface terminologies also can facilitate display of computer-stored patient information to clinician-users. Interface terminologies "interface" between clinicians' own unfettered, colloquial conceptualizations of patient descriptors and the more structured, coded internal data elements used by specific health care application programs. The intended uses of a terminology determine its conceptual underpinnings, structure, and content. As a result, the desiderata for interface terminologies differ from desiderata for health care-related terminologies used for storage (e.g., SNOMED-CT), information retrieval (e.g., MeSH), and classification (e.g., ICD9-CM). Necessary but not sufficient attributes for an interface terminology include adequate synonym coverage, presence of relevant assertional knowledge, and a balance between pre- and post-coordination. To place interface terminologies in context, this article reviews historical goals and challenges of clinical terminology development in general and then focuses on the unique features of interface terminologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unintended consequences of computerized patient care system interventions may increase resource use, foster clinical errors, and reduce users' confidence.Objective: To evaluate three successive interventions designed to reduce serum magnesium test ordering through a care provider order entry system (CPOE). The second, modeled after a previously successful intervention, caused paradoxical increases in magnesium test ordering rates.Design: A time-series analysis modeled weekly rates of magnesium test ordering, underlying trends, the impact of the three successive interventions, and the impact of potential covariates. The first intervention exhorted users to discontinue unnecessary tests recurring more than 72 hours into the future. The second displayed recent magnesium, calcium, and phosphorus test results, limited testing to one test instance per order, and provided education regarding appropriate indications for testing. The third targeted only magnesium ordering, displayed recent results, limited testing to one instance per order, summarized indications for testing, and required users to select an indication.Participants: Clinicians at Vanderbilt University Hospital, a 609-bed academic inpatient tertiary care facility, from 1998 through 2003.Measurements: Weekly rates of new serum magnesium test orders, instances, and results.Results: At baseline, there were 539 magnesium tests ordered per week. This decreased to 380 (p = 0.001) per week after the first intervention, increased to 491 per week (p < 0.001) after the second, and decreased to 276 per week (p < 0.001) after the third.Conclusion: A clinical decision support intervention intended to regulate testing increased test order rates as an unintended result of decision support. CPOE implementers must carefully design resource-related interventions and monitor their impact over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Authors evaluated whether displaying context sensitive links to infrequently accessed educational materials and patient information via the user interface of an inpatient computerized care provider order entry (CPOE) system would affect access rates to the materials.Design: The CPOE of Vanderbilt University Hospital (VUH) included "baseline" clinical decision support advice for safety and quality. Authors augmented this with seven new primarily educational decision support features. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial compared clinicians' utilization rates for the new materials via two interfaces. Control subjects could access study-related decision support from a menu in the standard CPOE interface. Intervention subjects received active notification when study-related decision support was available through context sensitive, visibly highlighted, selectable hyperlinks.Measurements: Rates of opportunities to access and utilization of study-related decision support materials from April 1999 through March 2000 on seven VUH Internal Medicine wards.Results: During 4,466 intervention subject-days, there were 240,504 (53.9/subject-day) opportunities for study-related decision support, while during 3,397 control subject-days, there were 178,235 (52.5/subject-day) opportunities for such decision support, respectively (p = 0.11). Individual intervention subjects accessed the decision support features at least once on 3.8% of subject-days logged on (278 responses); controls accessed it at least once on 0.6% of subject-days (18 responses), with a response rate ratio adjusted for decision support frequency of 9.17 (95% confidence interval 4.6-18, p < 0.0005). On average, intervention subjects accessed study-related decision support materials once every 16 days individually and once every 1.26 days in aggregate.Conclusion: Highlighting availability of context-sensitive educational materials and patient information through visible hyperlinks significantly increased utilization rates for study-related decision support when compared to "standard" VUH CPOE methods, although absolute response rates were low. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laboratory testing of hospitalized patients, although essential, can be expensive and sometimes excessive. Attempts to reduce unnecessary testing have often been difficult to implement or sustain.Objective: Use of peer management through a resource utilization committee (RUC) to favorably modify test-ordering behavior in a large academic medical center.Design: Interrupted time-series study.Setting: Medical center with inpatient care provider order entry (CPOE) system and database of ordered tests.Participants: Predominantly housestaff physicians but all clinical staff (attending physicians, housestaff, medical students, nurses, advance practice nurses, and other clinical staff) at Vanderbilt University Hospital who used CPOE systems.Intervention: The RUC analyzed the ordering habits of providers during previous years and made 2 interventions by modifying software for the CPOE system. The committee first initiated a daily prompt in the system that asked providers whether they wanted to discontinue tests scheduled beyond 72 hours. After evaluating this first intervention, the committee further constrained testing options by unbundling serum metabolic panel tests (sodium, potassium, chloride, bicarbonate, glucose, blood urea nitrogen, and creatinine tests) into single components and by reducing the ease of repeating targeted tests (including electrolyte, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and glucose tests; electrocardiography; and portable chest radiography).Measurements: Pre- and postintervention volumes of tests; proportion of patients with abnormal targeted chemistry levels after 48 hours; rates of repeated admission, transfer to intensive care units, and mortality; adjusted coefficient of variation for test ordering; and length of stay.Results: Voluntary reduction of testing beyond 72 hours (first intervention) decreased orders for metabolic panel component tests by 24% (P = 0.02) and electrocardiograms by 57% (P = 0.006) but not orders for portable chest radiographs. Prospective constraints on recurrent test ordering with panel unbundling (second intervention) produced an additional decrease of 51% for metabolic panel component tests (P < 0.001) and 16% for portable chest radiographs (P = 0.03). Incidence of patients with abnormal targeted blood chemistry levels after 48 hours decreased after the intervention (P = 0.02). Postintervention-adjusted coefficients of variation decreased for metabolic panel component tests (P = 0.03) and electrocardiography (P = 0.04). Rates of (adjusted) monthly readmission, transfers to intensive care units, hospital length of stay, and mortality were unchanged.Limitations: Other activities occurring during the time period of the interventions might have influenced some test-ordering behaviors, and we assessed effects on only a limited number of commonly ordered tests.Conclusions: Peer management reduced provider variability by addressing the imperfect ability of clinicians to rescind testing in a timely manner. Hospitals with growing health care costs can improve their resource utilization through peer management of testing behaviors by using CPOE systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Care providers' adoption of computer-based health-related documentation ('note capture') tools has been limited, even though such tools have the potential to facilitate information gathering and to promote efficiency of clinical charting. The authors have developed and deployed a computerized note-capture tool that has been made available to end users through a care provider order entry (CPOE) system already in wide use at Vanderbilt. Overall note-capture tool usage between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2001, increased substantially, both in the number of users and in their frequency of use. This case report is provided as an example of how an existing care provider order entry environment can facilitate clinical end-user adoption of a computer-assisted documentation tool-a concept that may seem counterintuitive to some. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hereditary cancer syndromes cause a high lifetime risk of early, aggressive cancers. Early recognition of individuals at risk can allow risk-reducing interventions that improve morbidity and mortality. Family health history applications that gather data directly from patients could alleviate barriers to risk assessment in the clinical appointment, such as lack of provider knowledge of genetics guidelines and limited time in the clinical appointment. New approaches allow linking these applications to patient health portals and their electronic health records (EHRs), offering an end-to-end solution for patient-input family history information and risk result clinical decision support for their provider., Methods: We describe the design of the first large-scale evaluation of an EHR-integrable, patient-facing family history software platform based on the Substitutable Medical Applications and Reusable Technologies on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (SMART on FHIR) standard. In our study, we leverage an established implementation science framework to evaluate the success of our model to facilitate scalable, systematic risk assessment for hereditary cancers in diverse clinical environments in a large pragmatic study at two sites. We will also evaluate the success of the approach to improve the efficiency of downstream genetic counseling resulting from pre-counseling pedigree generation., Conclusions: Our research study will provide evidence regarding a new care delivery model that is scalable and sustainable for a variety of medical centers and clinics., Trial Registration: This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT05079334 on 15 October 2021., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives:  Efforts to reduce documentation burden (DocBurden) for all health professionals (HP) are aligned with national initiatives to improve clinician wellness and patient safety. Yet DocBurden has not been precisely defined, limiting national conversations and rigorous, reproducible, and meaningful measures. Increasing attention to DocBurden motivated this work to establish a standard definition of DocBurden, with the emergence of excessive DocBurden as a term., Methods:  We conducted a scoping review of DocBurden definitions and descriptions, searching six databases for scholarly, peer-reviewed, and gray literature sources, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extensions for Scoping Review guidance. For the concept clarification phase of work, we used the American Nursing Informatics Association's Six Domains of Burden Framework., Results:  A total of 153 articles were included based on a priori criteria. Most articles described a focus on DocBurden, but only 18% ( n  = 28) provided a definition. We define excessive DocBurden as the stress and unnecessarily heavy work an HP or health care team experiences when usability of documentation systems and documentation activities (i.e., generation, review, analysis, and synthesis of patient data) are not aligned in support of care delivery. A negative connotation was attached to burden without a neutral state in included sources, which does not align with dictionary definitions of burden., Conclusion:  Existing literature does not distinguish between a baseline or required task load to conduct patient care resulting from usability issues ( DocBurden ), and the unnecessarily heavy tasks and requirements that contribute to excessive DocBurden . Our definition of excessive DocBurden explicitly acknowledges this distinction, to support development of meaningful measures for understanding and intervening on excessive DocBurden locally, nationally, and internationally., Competing Interests: A.J.M. reports employment by JP Morgan Chase, with a role at the financial institution unrelated to her capacities associated with this research, and this work was performed on her own time. K.C. reports grant funding from National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) and American Nursing Foundation, and a leadership role for AMIA (Board Member). J.J.C. reports professional duties at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. D.E.D. reports leadership roles on the Corporation for Corporation for National Research Initiatives (Board Member) and the International Academy for Health Sciences Informatics (Board Member). C.D. reports receiving training funding from National Library of Medicine T15 Training grant. K.J. reports grants from FDA Sentinel Program, NIH Pioneer Award, support for attending NIH and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation meetings, and leadership roles for American College of Medical Informatics (President), ex officio member of AMIA Board of Directors, and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Chair of National Advisory Committee for Amos Medical Faculty Development Program). J.A.M. reports serving on scientific advisory board for and holding shares in Augmedix. R.G.M. reports funding from the American Medical Association. S.C.R. reports grant funding from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, NINR, and a leadership role for AMIA (Chair of AMIA's 25 × 5 Task Force). V.T. reports a leadership role for AMIA (Board Member)., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

A person's phenotypic sex (i.e., endogenous expression of primary, secondary, and endocrinological sex characteristics) can impact crucial aspects of genetic assessment and resulting clinical care recommendations. In studies with genetics components, it is critical to collect phenotypic sex, information about current organ/tissue inventory and hormonal milieu, and gender identity. If researchers do not carefully construct data models, transgender, gender diverse, and sex diverse (TGSD) individuals may be given inappropriate care recommendations and/or be subjected to misgendering, inflicting medical and psychosocial harms. The recognized need for an inclusive care experience should not be limited to clinical practice but should extend to the research setting, where researchers must build an inclusive experience for TGSD participants. Here, we review three TGSD participants in the Family History and Cancer Risk Study (FOREST) to critically evaluate sex- and gender-related survey measures and associated data models in a study seeking to identify patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Furthermore, we leverage these participants' responses to sex- and gender identity-related questions in FOREST to inform needed changes to the FOREST data model and to make recommendations for TGSD-inclusive genetics research design, data models, and processes., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Genetic Counseling published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Burnout and workforce shortages are having a negative impact on nurses globally, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the United States, excessive documentation burden (DocBurden) has been linked to nurse burnout. The experience of a system or system-imposed process inhibiting patient care is a core focus area of nursing informatics research. The American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) 25x5 Task Force to Reduce DocBurden was created in 2022 to decrease U.S. health professionals' excessive DocBurden to 25% of current state within five years through impactful solutions across health systems that decrease non-value-added documentation, and leverage public/private partnerships and advocacy. This case study will describe the work of the 25x5 Task Force that is relevant to nursing practice. Specifically, we will describe three projects: A) Toolkit for Reducing Excessive DocBurden, B) Development of Pulse Survey for Health Professionals Perceived DocBurden, and C) HIT Roadmap to Promote Interoperability.

Patient portal messages often relate to specific clinical phenomena (e.g., patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer) and, as a result, have received increasing attention in biomedical research. These messages require natural language processing and, while word embedding models, such as word2vec, have the potential to extract meaningful signals from text, they are not readily applicable to patient portal messages. This is because embedding models typically require millions of training samples to sufficiently represent semantics, while the volume of patient portal messages associated with a particular clinical phenomenon is often relatively small. We introduce a novel adaptation of the word2vec model, PK-word2vec (where PK stands for prior knowledge), for small-scale messages. PK-word2vec incorporates the most similar terms for medical words (including problems, treatments, and tests) and non-medical words from two pre-trained embedding models as prior knowledge to improve the training process. We applied PK-word2vec in a case study of patient portal messages in the Vanderbilt University Medical Center electric health record system sent by patients diagnosed with breast cancer from December 2004 to November 2017. We evaluated the model through a set of 1000 tasks, each of which compared the relevance of a given word to a group of the five most similar words generated by PK-word2vec and a group of the five most similar words generated by the standard word2vec model. We recruited 200 Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) workers and 7 medical students to perform the tasks. The dataset was composed of 1389 patient records and included 137,554 messages with 10,683 unique words. Prior knowledge was available for 7981 non-medical and 1116 medical words. In over 90% of the tasks, both reviewers indicated PK-word2vec generated more similar words than standard word2vec (p = 0.01).The difference in the evaluation by AMT workers versus medical students was negligible for all comparisons of tasks' choices between the two groups of reviewers ( p = 0.774 under a paired t-test). PK-word2vec can effectively learn word representations from a small message corpus, marking a significant advancement in processing patient portal messages., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is increasingly common in routine clinical practice. As tools to quantify symptoms and health status, PROMs play an important role in focusing health care on outcomes that matter to patients. The uses of PROM data are myriad, ranging from clinical care to survey-based research and quality improvement. Discerning the boundaries between these use cases can be challenging for institutional review boards (IRBs). In this article, we provide a framework for classifying the three primary PROM use cases (clinical care, human subjects research, and quality improvement) and discuss the level of IRB oversight (if any) necessary for each. One of the most important considerations for IRB staff is whether PROMs are being used primarily for clinical care and thus do not constitute human subjects research. We discuss characteristics of PROMs implemented primarily for clinical care, focusing on: data platform; survey location; questionnaire length; patient interface; and clinician interface. We also discuss IRB oversight of projects involving the secondary use of PROM data that were collected during the course of clinical care, which span human subjects research and quality improvement. This framework provides practical guidance for IRB staff as well as clinicians who use PROMs as communication aids in routine clinical practice., (© 2024 The Authors. Ethics & Human Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Hastings Center.)

Background: Despite the potential to significantly reduce complications, many patients do not consistently receive diabetes preventive care. Our research team recently applied user-centered design sprint methodology to develop a patient portal intervention empowering patients to address selected diabetes care gaps (eg, no diabetes eye examination in last 12 months)., Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effect of our novel diabetes care gap intervention on completion of selected evidence-based diabetes preventive care services and secondary outcomes., Methods: We are conducting a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of the effect of the intervention on diabetes care gaps. Adult patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are recruited from primary care clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants are eligible if they have type 1 or 2 DM, can read in English, are aged 18-75 years, have a current patient portal account, and have reliable access to a mobile device with internet access. We exclude patients with medical conditions that prevent them from using a mobile device, severe difficulty seeing, pregnant women or women who plan to become pregnant during the study period, and patients on dialysis. Participants will be randomly assigned to the intervention or usual care. The primary outcome measure will be the number of diabetes care gaps among 4 DM preventive care services (diabetes eye examination, pneumococcal vaccination, hemoglobin A 1c , and urine microalbumin) at 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes will include diabetes self-efficacy, confidence managing diabetes in general, understanding of diabetes preventive care, diabetes distress, patient portal satisfaction, and patient-initiated orders at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after randomization. An ordinal logistic regression model will be used to quantify the effect of the intervention on the number of diabetes care gaps at the 12-month follow-up. For dichotomous secondary outcomes, a logistic regression model will be used with random effects for the clinic and provider variables as needed. For continuous secondary outcomes, a regression model will be used., Results: This study is ongoing. Recruitment was closed in February 2022; a total of 433 patients were randomized. Of those randomized, most (n=288, 66.5%) were non-Hispanic White, 33.5% (n=145) were racial or ethnic minorities, 33.9% (n=147) were aged 65 years or older, and 30.7% (n=133) indicated limited health literacy., Conclusions: The study directly tests the hypothesis that a patient portal intervention-alerting patients about selected diabetes care gaps, fostering understanding of their significance, and allowing patients to initiate care-will reduce diabetes care gaps compared with usual care. The insights gained from this study may have broad implications for developing future interventions to address various care gaps, such as gaps in cancer screening, and contribute to the development of effective, scalable, and sustainable approaches to engage patients in chronic disease management and prevention., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04894903; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04894903., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/56123., (©Amber J Hackstadt, Tom A Elasy, Sapna Gangaputra, Kryseana J Harper, Lindsay S Mayberry, Lyndsay A Nelson, Neeraja B Peterson, S Trent Rosenbloom, Zhihong Yu, William Martinez. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 28.06.2024.)

Background: Patient portal messages often relate to specific clinical phenomena (e.g., patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer) and, as a result, have received increasing attention in biomedical research. These messages require natural language processing and, while word embedding models, such as word2vec, have the potential to extract meaningful signals from text, they are not readily applicable to patient portal messages. This is because embedding models typically require millions of training samples to sufficiently represent semantics, while the volume of patient portal messages associated with a particular clinical phenomenon is often relatively small., Objective: We introduce a novel adaptation of the word2vec model, PK-word2vec, for small-scale messages., Methods: PK-word2vec incorporates the most similar terms for medical words (including problems, treatments, and tests) and non-medical words from two pre-trained embedding models as prior knowledge to improve the training process. We applied PK-word2vec on patient portal messages in the Vanderbilt University Medical Center electric health record system sent by patients diagnosed with breast cancer from December 2004 to November 2017. We evaluated the model through a set of 1000 tasks, each of which compared the relevance of a given word to a group of the five most similar words generated by PK-word2vec and a group of the five most similar words generated by the standard word2vec model. We recruited 200 Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) workers and 7 medical students to perform the tasks., Results: The dataset was composed of 1,389 patient records and included 137,554 messages with 10,683 unique words. Prior knowledge was available for 7,981 non-medical and 1,116 medical words. In over 90% of the tasks, both reviewers indicated PK-word2vec generated more similar words than standard word2vec (p=0.01).The difference in the evaluation by AMT workers versus medical students was negligible for all comparisons of tasks' choices between the two groups of reviewers (p = 0.774 under a paired t-test)., Conclusions: PK-word2vec can effectively learn word representations from a small message corpus, marking a significant advancement in processing patient portal messages., Competing Interests: Additional Declarations: No competing interests reported.

Background:  Studies have shown that documentation burden experienced by clinicians may lead to less direct patient care, increased errors, and job dissatisfaction. Implementing effective strategies within health care systems to mitigate documentation burden can result in improved clinician satisfaction and more time spent with patients. However, there is a gap in the literature regarding evidence-based interventions to reduce documentation burden., Objectives:  The objective of this review was to identify and comprehensively summarize the state of the science related to documentation burden reduction efforts., Methods:  Following Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases, including PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, Scopus, and Web of Science. Additionally, we searched gray literature and used Google Scholar to ensure a thorough review. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, followed by full-text review, with a third reviewer resolving any discrepancies. Data extraction was performed and a table of evidence was created., Results:  A total of 34 articles were included in the review, published between 2016 and 2022, with a majority focusing on the United States. The efforts described can be categorized into medical scribes, workflow improvements, educational interventions, user-driven approaches, technology-based solutions, combination approaches, and other strategies. The outcomes of these efforts often resulted in improvements in documentation time, workflow efficiency, provider satisfaction, and patient interactions., Conclusion:  This scoping review provides a comprehensive summary of health system documentation burden reduction efforts. The positive outcomes reported in the literature emphasize the potential effectiveness of these efforts. However, more research is needed to identify universally applicable best practices, and considerations should be given to the transfer of burden among members of the health care team, quality of education, clinician involvement, and evaluation methods., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Patients with inequitable access to patient portals frequently present to emergency departments (EDs) for care. Little is known about portal use patterns among ED patients., Objectives: To describe real-time patient portal usage trends among ED patients and compare demographic and clinical characteristics between portal users and nonusers., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study of 12 teaching and 24 academic-affiliated EDs from 8 health systems in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington, patient portal access and usage data were evaluated for all ED patients 18 years or older between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022., Exposure: Use of the patient portal during ED visit., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the weekly proportions of ED patients who logged into the portal, viewed test results, and viewed clinical notes in real time. Pooled random-effects models were used to evaluate temporal trends and demographic and clinical characteristics associated with real-time portal use., Results: The study included 1 280 924 unique patient encounters (53.5% female; 0.6% American Indian or Alaska Native, 3.7% Asian, 18.0% Black, 10.7% Hispanic, 0.4% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 66.5% White, 10.0% other race, and 4.0% with missing race or ethnicity; 91.2% English-speaking patients; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [19.2] years). During the study, 17.4% of patients logged into the portal while in the ED, whereas 14.1% viewed test results and 2.5% viewed clinical notes. The odds of accessing the portal (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19-1.56), viewing test results (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30-2.04), and viewing clinical notes (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.19-2.15) were higher at the end of the study vs the beginning. Patients with active portal accounts at ED arrival had a higher odds of logging into the portal (OR, 17.73; 95% CI, 9.37-33.56), viewing test results (OR, 18.50; 95% CI, 9.62-35.57), and viewing clinical notes (OR, 18.40; 95% CI, 10.31-32.86). Patients who were male, Black, or without commercial insurance had lower odds of logging into the portal, viewing results, and viewing clinical notes., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that real-time patient portal use during ED encounters has increased over time, but disparities exist in portal access that mirror trends in portal usage more generally. Given emergency medicine's role in caring for medically underserved patients, there are opportunities for EDs to enroll and train patients in using patient portals to promote engagement during and after their visits.

Abstract: Telehealth is a broad concept that refers to any delivery of health care in real time using technologies to connect people or information that are not in the same physical location. Until fairly recently, telehealth was more aspiration than reality. This situation changed radically due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a near-overnight inability for patients to be seen for routine management of chronic health conditions, including those with cancer. The purpose of this brief narrative review is to outline some areas where emerging and future technology may allow for innovations with specific implications for people with a current or past diagnosis of cancer, including underserved and/or historically excluded populations. Specific topics of telehealth are broadly covered in other areas of the special issue., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Included as part of the 21st Century Cures Act, the information blocking rule entered the first compliance phase in April 2021. Under this rule, post-acute long-term care (PALTC) facilities must not engage in any activity that interferes with accessing, using, or exchanging electronic health information. In addition, facilities must respond to information requests in a timely fashion and allow records to be readily available to patients and their delegates. Although hospitals have been slow to adapt to these changes, skilled nursing and other PALTC centers have been even slower. With a Final Rule enacted in recent years, awareness of the information-blocking rules became more crucial. We believe this commentary will help our colleagues interpret the rule for the PALTC setting. In addition, we provide points of emphasis to help guide those providers and administrative staff workers toward compliance and avoid potential penalties., (Copyright © 2023 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Precise, reliable, valid metrics that are cost-effective and require reasonable implementation time and effort are needed to drive electronic health record (EHR) improvements and decrease EHR burden. Differences exist between research and vendor definitions of metrics. PROCESS:  We convened three stakeholder groups (health system informatics leaders, EHR vendor representatives, and researchers) in a virtual workshop series to achieve consensus on barriers, solutions, and next steps to implementing the core EHR use metrics in ambulatory care. CONCLUSION:  Actionable solutions identified to address core categories of EHR metric implementation challenges include: (1) maintaining broad stakeholder engagement, (2) reaching agreement on standardized measure definitions across vendors, (3) integrating clinician perspectives, and (4) addressing cognitive and EHR burden. Building upon the momentum of this workshop's outputs offers promise for overcoming barriers to implementing EHR use metrics., Competing Interests: C.A.S. is employed by the American Medical Association. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as the American Medical Association policy. J.S.P. reports employment by Oracle Corporation. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest related to this work., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Objectives: Geocoding, the process of converting addresses into precise geographic coordinates, allows researchers and health systems to obtain neighborhood-level estimates of social determinants of health. This information supports opportunities to personalize care and interventions for individual patients based on the environments where they live. We developed an integrated offline geocoding pipeline to streamline the process of obtaining address-based variables, which can be integrated into existing data processing pipelines., Methods: POINT is a web-based, containerized, application for geocoding addresses that can be deployed offline and made available to multiple users across an organization. Our application supports use through both a graphical user interface and application programming interface to query geographic variables, by census tract, without exposing sensitive patient data. We evaluated our application's performance using two datasets: one consisting of 1 million nationally representative addresses sampled from Open Addresses, and the other consisting of 3,096 previously geocoded patient addresses., Results: A total of 99.4 and 99.8% of addresses in the Open Addresses and patient addresses datasets, respectively, were geocoded successfully. Census tract assignment was concordant with reference in greater than 90% of addresses for both datasets. Among successful geocodes, median (interquartile range) distances from reference coordinates were 52.5 (26.5-119.4) and 14.5 (10.9-24.6) m for the two datasets., Conclusion: POINT successfully geocodes more addresses and yields similar accuracy to existing solutions, including the U.S. Census Bureau's official geocoder. Addresses are considered protected health information and cannot be shared with common online geocoding services. POINT is an offline solution that enables scalability to multiple users and integrates downstream mapping to neighborhood-level variables with a pipeline that allows users to incorporate additional datasets as they become available. As health systems and researchers continue to explore and improve health equity, it is essential to quickly and accurately obtain neighborhood variables in a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant way., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

The 21st Century Cures Act mandates immediate availability of test results upon request. The Cures Act does not require that patients be informed of results, but many organizations send notifications when results become available. Our medical center implemented 2 sequential policies: immediate notifications for all results, and notifications only to patients who opt in. We used over 2 years of data from Vanderbilt University Medical Center to measure the effect of these policies on rates of patient-before-clinician result review and patient-initiated messaging using interrupted time series analysis. When releasing test results with immediate notification, the proportion of patient-before-clinician review increased 4-fold and the proportion of patients who sent messages rose 3%. After transition to opt-in notifications, patient-before-clinician review decreased 2.4% and patient-initiated messaging decreased 0.4%. Replacing automated notifications with an opt-in policy provides patients flexibility to indicate their preferences but may not substantially alleviate clinicians' messaging workload., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Importance: The 21st Century Cures Act includes an information-blocking rule (IBR) that requires health systems to provide patients with immediate access to their health information in the electronic medical record upon request. Patients accessing their health information before they receive an explanation from their health care team may experience confusion and may be more likely to share unsolicited patient complaints (UPCs) with their health care organization., Objective: To evaluate the quantity of UPCs about physicians before and after IBR implementation and to identify themes in UPCs that may identify patient confusion, fear, or anger related to the release of information., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted with an interrupted time-series analysis of UPCs spanning January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. The data were obtained from a single academic medical center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, at which the IBR was implemented on January 20, 2021. Data analysis was performed from January 11 to July 15, 2023., Exposure: Implementation of the IBR on January 20, 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the monthly rate of UPCs before and after IBR implementation. A qualitative analysis was performed for UPCs received after IBR implementation. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare monthly complaints between the pre- and post-IBR groups. The Pearson χ2 test was used to compare proportions of complaints by UPC category between time periods., Results: The medical center received 8495 UPCs during the study period: 3022 over 12 months before and 5473 over 18 months after institutional IBR implementation. There was no difference in the monthly proportions of UPCs per 1000 patient encounters before (median, 0.81 [IQR, 0.75-0.88]) and after (median, 0.83 [IQR, 0.77-0.89]) IBR implementation (difference in medians, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.07]; P =.86). Segmented regression analysis revealed no difference in monthly UPCs (β [SE], 0.03 [0.09]; P =.72)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, implementation of the Cures Act IBR was not associated with an increase in monthly rates of UPCs. These findings suggest that review of UPCs identified as IBR-specific complaints may allow clinicians and organizations to prepare patients that their test and procedure results may be available before clinicians are able to review them and respond.

Background and Objective: Recent external factors-the 21st Century Cures Act and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic-have stimulated major changes in the patient portal landscape. The objective of this state-of-the-art review is to describe recent developments in the patient portal literature and to identify recommendations and future directions for the design, implementation, and evaluation of portals., Methods: To focus this review on salient contemporary issues, we elected to center it on four topics: (1) 21st Century Cures Act's impact on patient portals (e.g., Open Notes); (2) COVID-19's pandemic impact on portals; (3) proxy access to portals; and (4) disparities in portal adoption and use. We conducted targeted PubMed searches to identify recent empirical studies addressing these topics, used a two-part screening process to determine relevance, and conducted thematic analyses., Results: Our search identified 174 unique papers, 74 were relevant empirical studies and included in this review. Among these papers, we identified 10 themes within our four a priori topics, including preparing for and understanding the consequences of increased patient access to their electronic health information (Cures Act); developing, deploying, and evaluating new virtual care processes (COVID-19); understanding current barriers to formal proxy use (proxy access); and addressing disparities in portal adoption and use (disparities)., Conclusion: Our results suggest that the recent trends toward understanding the implications of immediate access to most test results, exploring ways to close gaps in portal adoption and use among different sub-populations, and finding ways to leverage portals to improve health and health care are the next steps in the maturation of patient portals and are key areas that require more research. It is important that health care organizations share their innovative portal efforts, so that successful measures can be tested in other contexts, and progress can continue., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Addressing clinician documentation burden through "targeted solutions" is a growing priority for many organizations ranging from government and academia to industry. Between January and February 2021, the 25 by 5: Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden on US Clinicians by 75% (25X5 Symposium) convened across 2 weekly 2-hour sessions among experts and stakeholders to generate actionable goals for reducing clinician documentation over the next 5 years. Throughout this web-based symposium, we passively collected attendees' contributions to a chat functionality-with their knowledge that the content would be deidentified and made publicly available. This presented a novel opportunity to synthesize and understand participants' perceptions and interests from chat messages. We performed a content analysis of 25X5 Symposium chat logs to identify themes about reducing clinician documentation burden., Objective: The objective of this study was to explore unstructured chat log content from the web-based 25X5 Symposium to elicit latent insights on clinician documentation burden among clinicians, health care leaders, and other stakeholders using topic modeling., Methods: Across the 6 sessions, we captured 1787 messages among 167 unique chat participants cumulatively; 14 were private messages not included in the analysis. We implemented a latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic model on the aggregated dataset to identify clinician documentation burden topics mentioned in the chat logs. Coherence scores and manual examination informed optimal model selection. Next, 5 domain experts independently and qualitatively assigned descriptive labels to model-identified topics and classified them into higher-level categories, which were finalized through a panel consensus., Results: We uncovered ten topics using the LDA model: (1) determining data and documentation needs (422/1773, 23.8%); (2) collectively reassessing documentation requirements in electronic health records (EHRs) (252/1773, 14.2%); (3) focusing documentation on patient narrative (162/1773, 9.1%); (4) documentation that adds value (147/1773, 8.3%); (5) regulatory impact on clinician burden (142/1773, 8%); (6) improved EHR user interface and design (128/1773, 7.2%); (7) addressing poor usability (122/1773, 6.9%); (8) sharing 25X5 Symposium resources (122/1773, 6.9%); (9) capturing data related to clinician practice (113/1773, 6.4%); and (10) the role of quality measures and technology in burnout (110/1773, 6.2%). Among these 10 topics, 5 high-level categories emerged: consensus building (821/1773, 46.3%), burden sources (365/1773, 20.6%), EHR design (250/1773, 14.1%), patient-centered care (162/1773, 9.1%), and symposium comments (122/1773, 6.9%)., Conclusions: We conducted a topic modeling analysis on 25X5 Symposium multiparticipant chat logs to explore the feasibility of this novel application and elicit additional insights on clinician documentation burden among attendees. Based on the results of our LDA analysis, consensus building, burden sources, EHR design, and patient-centered care may be important themes to consider when addressing clinician documentation burden. Our findings demonstrate the value of topic modeling in discovering topics associated with clinician documentation burden using unstructured textual content. Topic modeling may be a suitable approach to examine latent themes presented in web-based symposium chat logs., (©Amanda J Moy, Jennifer Withall, Mollie Hobensack, Rachel Yeji Lee, Deborah R Levy, Sarah C Rossetti, S Trent Rosenbloom, Kevin Johnson, Kenrick Cato. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 17.05.2023.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to design and assess the formative usability of a novel patient portal intervention designed to empower patients with diabetes to initiate orders for diabetes-related monitoring and preventive services., Materials and Methods: We used a user-centered Design Sprint methodology to create our intervention prototype and assess its usability with 3 rounds of iterative testing. Participants (5/round) were presented with the prototype and asked to perform common, standardized tasks using think-aloud procedures. A facilitator rated task performance using a scale: (1) completed with ease, (2) completed with difficulty, and (3) failed. Participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) scored 0-worst to 100-best. All testing occurred remotely via Zoom., Results: We identified 3 main categories of usability issues: distrust about the automated system, content concerns, and layout difficulties. Changes included improving clarity about the ordering process and simplifying language; however, design constraints inherent to the electronic health record system limited our ability to respond to all usability issues (eg, could not modify fixed elements in layout). Percent of tasks completed with ease across each round were 67%, 60%, and 80%, respectively. Average SUS scores were 87, 74, and 93, respectively. Across rounds, participants found the intervention valuable and appreciated the concept of patient-initiated ordering., Conclusions: Through iterative user-centered design and testing, we improved the usability of the patient portal intervention. A tool that empowers patients to initiate orders for disease-specific services as part of their existing patient portal account has potential to enhance the completion of recommended health services and improve clinical outcomes., Competing Interests: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Importance: The 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule mandates the immediate electronic availability of test results to patients, likely empowering them to better manage their health. Concerns remain about unintended effects of releasing abnormal test results to patients., Objective: To assess patient and caregiver attitudes and preferences related to receiving immediately released test results through an online patient portal., Design, Setting, and Participants: This large, multisite survey study was conducted at 4 geographically distributed academic medical centers in the US using an instrument adapted from validated surveys. The survey was delivered in May 2022 to adult patients and care partners who had accessed test results via an online patient portal account between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022., Exposures: Access to test results via a patient portal between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: Responses to questions related to demographics, test type and result, reaction to result, notification experience and future preferences, and effect on health and well-being were aggregated. To evaluate characteristics associated with patient worry, logistic regression and pooled random-effects models were used to assess level of worry as a function of whether test results were perceived by patients as normal or not normal and whether patients were precounseled., Results: Of 43 380 surveys delivered, there were 8139 respondents (18.8%). Most respondents were female (5129 [63.0%]) and spoke English as their primary language (7690 [94.5%]). The median age was 64 years (IQR, 50-72 years). Most respondents (7520 of 7859 [95.7%]), including 2337 of 2453 individuals (95.3%) who received nonnormal results, preferred to immediately receive test results through the portal. Few respondents (411 of 5473 [7.5%]) reported that reviewing results before they were contacted by a health care practitioner increased worry, though increased worry was more common among respondents who received abnormal results (403 of 2442 [16.5%]) than those whose results were normal (294 of 5918 [5.0%]). The result of the pooled model for worry as a function of test result normality was statistically significant (odds ratio [OR], 2.71; 99% CI, 1.96-3.74), suggesting an association between worry and nonnormal results. The result of the pooled model evaluating the association between worry and precounseling was not significant (OR, 0.70; 99% CI, 0.31-1.59)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this multisite survey study of patient attitudes and preferences toward receiving immediately released test results via a patient portal, most respondents preferred to receive test results via the patient portal despite viewing results prior to discussion with a health care professional. This preference persisted among patients with nonnormal results.

Competing Interests: None declared.

Competing Interests: J.A. is a member of the Platform for AI Ethics, Netherlands Institute for Standardization (NEN), member of the NEN 7542 workgroup on standardization of medication process data and contract reviewer for the European Commission. S.A.-A. has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Agilent Biotechnologies, and Diazyme. A.D.B. has received grants or contracts from NIH and NSF, payment or honoraria from Adelphi University, and travel support from Microsoft. A.J.B. is a cofounder of and consultant to Personalis and NuMedii; consultant to Mango Tree Corporation, and in the recent past, Samsung, 10x Genomics, Helix, Pathway Genomics, and Verinata (Illumina); has served on paid advisory panels or boards for Geisinger Health, Regenstrief Institute, Gerson Lehman Group, AlphaSights, Covance, Novartis, Genentech, and Merck, and Roche; is a shareholder in Personalis and NuMedii; is a minor shareholder in Apple, Meta (Facebook), Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, Amazon, Snap, 10x Genomics, Illumina, Regeneron, Sanofi, Pfizer, Royalty Pharma, Moderna, Sutro, Doximity, BioNtech, Invitae, Pacific Biosciences, Editas Medicine, Nuna Health, Assay Depot, and Vet24seven, and several other non–health-related companies and mutual funds; and has received honoraria and travel reimbursement for invited talks from Johnson and Johnson, Roche, Genentech, Pfizer, Merck, Lilly, Takeda, Varian, Mars, Siemens, Optum, Abbott, Celgene, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Westat, and many academic institutions, medical or disease specific foundations and associations, and health systems. A.J.B. receives royalty payments through Stanford University, for several patents and other disclosures licensed to NuMedii and Personalis. A.J.B.'s research has been funded by NIH, Peraton (as the prime on an NIH contract), Genentech, Johnson and Johnson, FDA, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Leon Lowenstein Foundation, Intervalien Foundation, Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg, the Barbara and Gerson Bakar Foundation, and in the recent past, the March of Dimes, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, California Governor's Office of Planning and Research, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, L'Oreal, and Progenity. A.B.C. has received consulting fees from Invitae Corporation. J.K.C. has received grants or contracts from the Office of Rural Health and Office of Healthcare and Equity, VHA. P.L.E. has received grants or contracts from NLM, NIAAA, and NCATS. Oluseyi Fayanju has received grants or contracts from GetSmarter. L.J.F. serves as a consultant to the American Psychiatric Association, has received travel support in relation to that role, and has also received grant support from NIMH. B.R.J. has received stock or stock options from Consent Vault, LLC. V.N.-J. occupies leadership or fiduciary roles with the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine and West Central Illinois Breastfeeding Task Force. Ross Koppel has received consulting fees from advisors who contemplate investment in EHR companies, payment or honoraria from University at Buffalo, payment for expert testimony from the U.S. Department of Justice, stock or stock options from TrekIT, and occupies editor roles with the Journal of Applied Clinical Informatics and the International Journal of Medical Informatics. B.K. has received payment or honoraria from the Fall DeVos Medical Ethics Colloquy, and travel support to attend CSHI and AMIA conferences. C.U.L. has received royalties or licenses from Springer, has participated in a Data Safety monitoring board conducted by Lipika Samal at Harvard, and has received stock or stock options from Markel and Celanese. Z.C.L. has received consulting fees from Atrius Health, travel support from the University of Washington, Atrius Health, and Jackson Health System. R.J.M. has supported the present manuscript as a Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholar, has received grants or contracts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Sergey Brin Family Foundation, and Verily Life Sciences, payment or honoraria from Clinical Infectious Diseases, and occupies a leadership role with the Infectious Diseases Society of America. E.R.M. has received grants or contracts from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the American Medical Association, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. A.B.N. has received grants or contracts from Royal Phillips and Eli Lilly, consulting fees from Intuity Medical, Roche, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Greenberg Traurig, and Medtronic, payment or honoraria from The Doctors Company and TCOYD, and payment for expert testimony from AMFS. L.L.N. has received grants or contracts from GetPreCiSe, Florida State University, AHRQ, Baptist Memorial Healthcare Corporation, IBM Watson Health, and NIH/NIDDK. Deepti Pandita has received travel support from AMIA, has a patent pending with WellPulse app, and is a board member of AMIA. Raghuveer Puttagunta is a board member of Pennsylvania Medical Society. Angela Ryan is a member of AMIA and vice chair of the Australasian Institute of Digital Health. K.M.R. occupies a leadership role with the Society of Hospital Medicine Public Policy Committee. Neda Ratanawongsa occupies a leadership role with the San Francisco General Foundation. K.A.S. has received grants from Meds360 and Anonymous Foundation, honoraria from Stanford, travel support from the Society of Family Planning, and is a volunteer board member of the Society of Family Planning. Vignesh Subbian has received a grant from the National Science Foundation and occupies a leadership role with the AMIA ELSI Working Group. Ida Sim is a scientific advisor with Myovant Sciences. A.S. has received grants from NCATS Chicago Institute for Translational Medicine and PCORI Capricorn CRN, occupies leadership roles with the American Medical Informatics Association and IEEE Standards Association, and owns stock from Pfizer, Moderna, and J.B.S. holds leadership roles in AMIA and in the American College of Medical Informatics (ACMI), has received research funding from NIH and the Greenwall Foundation, and honoraria or consulting fees from the University of Kentucky, the University of Wisconsin, and the Icahn Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Peter Winkelstein has received a grant or contract from CTSA. J.X. has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board with AfaSci, Inc. and Develo. C.Z. has received grants or contracts from CVS Foundation and Ariadne Labs, royalties, or licenses from UpToDate, consulting fees from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, and occupies leadership or fiduciary roles with the American Heart Association, Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine, and ACOG.

Objectives: Health care providers managing the complex health needs of adolescents must comply with state laws governing adolescent consent and right to privacy. However, these laws vary. Our objectives were to summarize consent and privacy laws state-by-state and assess the implications of variation for compliance with the 21st Century Cures Act and with evidence-based guidance on adolescent care., Methods: We summarized state laws and regulations on minor consent for the following: health services, substance abuse treatment, prenatal care, mental health care, contraceptive management, immunizations, sexually transmitted infection management, human immunodeficiency viruses testing and treatment, dental care, and sexual assault evaluation. We compared state laws and regulations with American Academy of Pediatrics' evidence-based guidelines to assess consistencies in guidance., Results: We observed notable state-by-state variability in laws governing consent for adolescent patients. No states had identical policies for all services studied. For example, although all states had provisions for consent to management of sexually transmitted infections, there were variable specifications in the age and type of minor, whether this includes human immunodeficiency viruses, and whether confidentiality is protected. Providing confidential care to the adolescent patient has been set as a priority by medical societies; however, guidelines are limited by the need to comply with state laws and regulations., Conclusions: State laws on consent and privacy for adolescents are highly variable, and many do not reflect pediatric professional standards of care. This inconsistency is a barrier to operationalizing a consistent and equitable experience providing evidence-based medical care and ensuring adolescent privacy protection., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Background: The widespread adoption of electronic health records and a simultaneous increase in regulatory demands have led to an acceleration of documentation requirements among clinicians. The corresponding burden from documentation requirements is a central contributor to clinician burnout and can lead to an increased risk of suboptimal patient care., Objective: To address the problem of documentation burden, the 25 by 5: Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden on United States Clinicians by 75% by 2025 (Symposium) was organized to provide a forum for experts to discuss the current state of documentation burden and to identify specific actions aimed at dramatically reducing documentation burden for clinicians., Methods: The Symposium consisted of six weekly sessions with 33 presentations. The first four sessions included panel presentations discussing the challenges related to documentation burden. The final two sessions consisted of breakout groups aimed at engaging attendees in establishing interventions for reducing clinical documentation burden. Steering Committee members analyzed notes from each breakout group to develop a list of action items., Results: The Steering Committee synthesized and prioritized 82 action items into Calls to Action among three stakeholder groups: Providers and Health Systems, Vendors, and Policy and Advocacy Groups. Action items were then categorized into as short-, medium-, or long-term goals. Themes that emerged from the breakout groups' notes include the following: accountability, evidence is critical, education and training, innovation of technology, and other miscellaneous goals (e.g., vendors will improve shared knowledge databases)., Conclusion: The Symposium successfully generated a list of interventions for short-, medium-, and long-term timeframes as a launching point to address documentation burden in explicit action-oriented ways. Addressing interventions to reduce undue documentation burden placed on clinicians will necessitate collaboration among all stakeholders., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To develop and evaluate an electronic tool that collects interval history and incorporates it into a provider summary note., Methods: A parent-facing online before-visit questionnaire (BVQ) collected information from parents and caregivers of pediatric diabetes patients prior to a clinic encounter. This information was related to interval history and perceived self-management barriers. The BVQ generated a summary note that providers could paste in their own documentation. Parents also completed postvisit experience questionnaires. We assessed the BVQs perceived usefulness to parents and providers and compared provider documentation content and length pre- and post-BVQ rollout. We interviewed providers regarding their experiences with the system-generated note., Results: Seventy-three parents of diabetic children were recruited and completed the BVQ. A total of 79% of parents stated that the BVQ helped with visit preparation and 80% said it improved perceived quality of visits. All 16 participating providers reviewed BVQs prior to patient encounters and 100% considered the summary beneficial. Most providers (81%) desired summaries less than 1 week old. A total of 69% of providers preferred the prose version of the summary; however, 75% also viewed the bulleted version as preferable for provider review. Analysis of provider notes revealed that BVQs increased provider documentation of patients' adherence and barriers. We observed a 50% reduction in typing by providers to document interval histories. Providers not using summaries typed an average of 137 words (standard deviation [SD]: 74) to document interval history compared with 68 words [SD 47] typed with BVQ use., Discussion: Providers and parents of children with diabetes appreciated the use of previsit, parent-completed BVQs that automatically produced provider documentation. Despite the BVQ redistributing work from providers to parents, its use was acceptable to both groups., Conclusion: Parent-completed questionnaires on the patient's behalf that generate provider documentation encourage communication between parents and providers regarding disease management and reduce provider workload., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Substantial strategies to reduce clinical documentation were implemented by health care systems throughout the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at national and local levels. This natural experiment provides an opportunity to study the impact of documentation reduction strategies on documentation burden among clinicians and other health professionals in the United States., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess clinicians' and other health care leaders' experiences with and perceptions of COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies and identify which implemented strategies should be prioritized and remain permanent post-pandemic., Methods: We conducted a national survey of clinicians and health care leaders to understand COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies implemented during the pandemic using snowball sampling through professional networks, listservs, and social media. We developed and validated a 19-item survey leveraging existing post-COVID-19 policy and practice recommendations proposed by Sinsky and Linzer. Participants rated reduction strategies for impact on documentation burden on a scale of 0 to 100. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed., Results: Of the 351 surveys initiated, 193 (55%) were complete. Most participants were informaticians and/or clinicians and worked for a health system or in academia. A majority experienced telehealth expansion (81.9%) during the pandemic, which participants also rated as highly impactful (60.1-61.5) and preferred that it remain (90.5%). Implemented at lower proportions, documenting only pertinent positives to reduce note bloat (66.1 ± 28.3), c hanging compliance rules and performance metrics to eliminate those without evidence of net benefit (65.7 ± 26.3), and electronic health record (EHR) optimization sprints (64.3 ± 26.9) received the highest impact scores compared with other strategies presented; support for these strategies widely ranged (49.7-63.7%)., Conclusion: The results of this survey suggest there are many perceived sources of and solutions for documentation burden. Within strategies, we found considerable support for telehealth, documenting pertinent positives, and changing compliance rules. We also found substantial variation in the experience of documentation burden among participants., Competing Interests: None declared., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).)

Objective: The effects of shared clinical notes on patients, care partners, and clinicians ("open notes") were first studied as a demonstration project in 2010. Since then, multiple studies have shown clinicians agree shared progress notes are beneficial to patients, and patients and care partners report benefits from reading notes. To determine if implementing open notes at a hematology/oncology practice changed providers' documentation style, we assessed the length and readability of clinicians' notes before and after open notes implementation at an academic medical center in Boston, MA, USA., Materials and Methods: We analyzed 143 888 notes from 60 hematology/oncology clinicians before and after the open notes debut at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, from January 1, 2012 to September 1, 2016. We measured the providers' (medical doctor/nurse practitioner) documentation styles by analyzing character length, the number of addenda, note entry mode (dictated vs typed), and note readability. Measurements used 5 different readability formulas and were assessed on notes written before and after the introduction of open notes on November 25, 2013., Results: After the introduction of open notes, the mean length of progress notes increased from 6174 characters to 6648 characters ( P  < .001), and the mean character length of the "assessment and plan" (A&P) increased from 1435 characters to 1597 characters ( P  < .001). The Average Grade Level Readability of progress notes decreased from 11.50 to 11.33, and overall readability improved by 0.17 ( P  = .01). There were no statistically significant changes in the length or readability of "Initial Notes" or Letters, inter-doctor communication, nor in the modality of the recording of any kind of note., Conclusions: After the implementation of open notes, progress notes and A&P sections became both longer and easier to read. This suggests clinician documenters may be responding to the perceived pressures of a transparent medical records environment., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Background: In the United States, attention has been focused on "open notes" and "open results" since the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology implemented the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule on information blocking. Open notes is an established best practice, but open results remains controversial, especially for diseases associated with stigma, morbidity, and mortality. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with all three of these effects and represents an ideal disease for the study of open results for sensitive test results., Objectives: This study evaluates patient perspectives related to receiving COVID-19 test results via an online patient portal prior to discussion with a clinician., Methods: We surveyed adults who underwent COVID-19 testing between March 1, 2020 and October 21, 2020 who agreed to be directly contacted about COVID-19-related research about their perspectives on receiving test results via a patient portal. We evaluated user roles (i.e., patient vs. care partner), demographic information, ease of use, impact of immediate release, notification of results, impact of viewing results on health management, and importance of sharing results with others., Results: Users were mostly patients themselves. Users found the portal easy to use but expressed mixed preferences about the means of notification of result availability (e.g., email, text, or phone call). Users found immediate access to results useful for managing their health, employment, and family/childcare. Many users shared their results and encouraged others to get tested. Our cohort consisted mostly of non-Hispanic white, highly educated, English-speaking patients., Conclusion: Overall, patients found open results useful for COVID-19 testing and few expressed increased worries from receiving their results via the patient portal. The demographics of our cohort highlight the need for further research in patient portal equity in the age of open results., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a multi-faceted intervention embedded within an established patient portal, My Health at Vanderbilt. MDC is designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-care. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, provides literacy-level appropriate educational resources, and links to a diabetes online patient support community and diabetes news feeds., Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effects of MDC on patient activation in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Moreover, we plan to assess secondary outcomes, including system use and usability, and the effects of MDC on cognitive and behavioral outcomes (eg, self-care and self-efficacy)., Methods: We are conducting a 6-month, 2-arm, parallel-design, pragmatic pilot randomized controlled trial of the effect of MDC on patient activation. Adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are recruited from primary care clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants are eligible for the study if they are currently being treated with at least one diabetes medication, are able to speak and read in English, are 21 years or older, and have an existing My Health at Vanderbilt account and reliable access to a desktop or laptop computer with internet access. We exclude patients living in long-term care facilities, patients with known cognitive deficits or severe visual impairment, and patients currently participating in any other diabetes-related research study. Participants are randomly assigned to MDC or usual care. We collect self-reported survey data, including the Patient Activation Measure (R) at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. We will use mixed-effects regression models to estimate potentially time-varying intervention effects while adjusting for the baseline measure of the outcome. The mixed-effects model will use fixed effects for patient-level characteristics and random effects for health care provider variables (eg, primary care physicians)., Results: This study is ongoing. Recruitment was closed in May 2020; 270 patients were randomized. Of those randomized, most (214/267, 80.1%) were non-Hispanic White, and 13.1% (35/267) were non-Hispanic Black, 43.7% (118/270) reported being 65 years or older, and 33.6% (90/268) reported limited health literacy. We obtained at least 95.6% (258/270) completion among participants through the 3-month follow-up assessment., Conclusions: This randomized controlled trial will be one of the first to evaluate a patient-facing diabetes digital health intervention delivered via a patient portal. By embedding MDC into Epic's MyChart platform with more than 127 million patient records, our intervention is directly integrated into routine care, highly scalable, and sustainable. Our findings and evolving patient portal functionality will inform the continued development of MDC to best meet users' needs and a larger trial focused on the impact of MDC on clinical end points., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03947333; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03947333., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/25955., (©William Martinez, Amber J Hackstadt, Gerald B Hickson, S Trent Rosenbloom, Tom A Elasy. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 25.05.2021.)

Background: My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a novel, multifaceted patient portal intervention designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-management. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, and provides literacy level-appropriate educational resources., Objectives: We aimed to assess the usability, acceptability, perceptions, and potential impact of MDC., Methods: We recruited 69 participants from four clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants were given 1 month of access to MDC and completed pre- and post-questionnaires including validated measures of usability and patient activation, and questions about user experience., Results: Sixty participants completed the study. Participants' mean age was 58, 55% were females, 68% were Caucasians, and 48% had limited health literacy (HL). Most participants (80%) visited MDC three or more times and 50% spent a total of ≥15 minutes on MDC. Participants' median System Usability Scale (SUS) score was 78.8 [Q1, Q3: 72.5, 87.5] and significantly greater than the threshold value of 68 indicative of "above average" usability ( p  < 0.001). The median SUS score of patients with limited HL was similar to those with adequate HL (77.5 [72.5, 85.0] vs. 82.5 [72.5, 92.5]; p  = 0.41). Participants most commonly reported the literacy level-appropriate educational links and health data infographics as features that helped them better understand their diabetes health data (65%). All participants (100%) intended to continue to use MDC. Median Patient Activation Measure® scores increased postintervention (64.3 [55.6, 72.5] vs. 67.8 [60.6, 75.0]; p  = 0.01)., Conclusion: Participants, including those with limited HL, rated the usability of MDC above average, anticipated continued use, and identified key features that improved their understanding of diabetes health data. Patient activation improved over the study period. Our findings suggest MDC may be a beneficial addition to existing patient portals., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study examines the validity of optical mark recognition, a novel user interface, and crowdsourced data validation to rapidly digitize and extract data from paper COVID-19 assessment forms at a large medical center., Methods: An optical mark recognition/optical character recognition (OMR/OCR) system was developed to identify fields that were selected on 2,814 paper assessment forms, each with 141 fields which were used to assess potential COVID-19 infections. A novel user interface (UI) displayed mirrored forms showing the scanned assessment forms with OMR results superimposed on the left and an editable web form on the right to improve ease of data validation. Crowdsourced participants validated the results of the OMR system. Overall error rate and time taken to validate were calculated. A subset of forms was validated by multiple participants to calculate agreement between participants., Results: The OMR/OCR tools correctly extracted data from scanned forms fields with an average accuracy of 70% and median accuracy of 78% when the OMR/OCR results were compared with the results from crowd validation. Scanned forms were crowd-validated at a mean rate of 157 seconds per document and a volume of approximately 108 documents per day. A randomly selected subset of documents was reviewed by multiple participants, producing an interobserver agreement of 97% for documents when narrative-text fields were included and 98% when only Boolean and multiple-choice fields were considered., Conclusion: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it may be challenging for health care workers wearing personal protective equipment to interact with electronic health records. The combination of OMR/OCR technology, a novel UI, and crowdsourcing data-validation processes allowed for the efficient extraction of a large volume of paper medical documents produced during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objective: In the present study, we quantified the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the volume of adult and pediatric neurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and clinic visits at an academic medical center., Methods: Neurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and outpatient appointments at Vanderbilt University Medical Center were identified from March 23, 2020 through May 8, 2020 (during COVID-19) and March 25, 2019 through May 10, 2019 (before COVID-19). The neurosurgical volume was compared between the 2 periods., Results: A 40% reduction in weekly procedural volume was demonstrated during COVID-19 (median before, 75; interquartile range [IQR], 72-80; median during, 45; IQR, 43-47; P < 0.001). A 42% reduction occurred in weekly adult procedures (median before, 62; IQR, 54-70; median during, 36; IQR, 34-39; P < 0.001), and a 31% reduction occurred in weekly pediatric procedures (median before, 13; IQR, 12-14; median during, 9; IQR, 8-10; P = 0.004). Among adult procedures, the most significant decreases were seen for spine (P < 0.001) and endovascular (P < 0.001) procedures and cranioplasty (P < 0.001). A significant change was not found in the adult open vascular (P = 0.291), functional (P = 0.263), cranial tumor (P = 0.143), or hydrocephalus (P = 0.173) procedural volume. Weekly inpatient consultations to neurosurgery decreased by 24% (median before, 99; IQR, 94-114; median during, 75; IQR, 68-84; P = 0.008) for adults. Weekly in-person adult and pediatric outpatient clinic visits witnessed a 91% decrease (median before, 329; IQR, 326-374; median during, 29; IQR, 26-39; P < 0.001). In contrast, weekly telehealth encounters increased from a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0) before to a median of 151 (IQR, 126-156) during COVID-19 (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Significant reductions occurred in neurosurgical operations, clinic visits, and inpatient consultations during COVID-19. Telehealth was increasingly used for assessments. The long-term effects of the reduced neurosurgical volume and increased telehealth usage on patient outcomes should be explored., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 national emergency has led to surging care demand and the need for unprecedented telehealth expansion. Rapid telehealth expansion can be especially complex for pediatric patients. From the experience of a large academic medical center, this report describes a pathway for efficiently increasing capacity of remote pediatric enrollment for telehealth while fulfilling privacy, security, and convenience concerns. The design and implementation of the process took 2 days. Five process requirements were identified: efficient enrollment, remote ability to establish parentage, minimal additional work for application processing, compliance with guidelines for adolescent autonomy, and compliance with institutional privacy and security policies. Weekly enrollment subsequently increased 10-fold for children (age 0-12 years) and 1.2-fold for adolescents (age 13-17 years). Weekly telehealth visits increased 200-fold for children and 90-fold for adolescents. The obstacles and solutions presented in this report can provide guidance to health systems for similar challenges during the COVID-19 response and future disasters., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)