Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road L475, Portland, OR, 97239-3098, USA.
Division of General Internal Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Dec;33(12):2085-2091. doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4637-x. Epub 2018 Sep 5.
Electronic patient-portals offer the potential to enhance patient-physician communication and health outcomes but differential use may create or worsen disparities. While prior studies identified patient characteristics associated with patient-portal use, the role of physician factors is less known. We investigated differences in overall and patterns of portal use for patients with resident and attending primary care providers (PCPs).
Cross-sectional study of all established patients with a resident or attending PCP seen at an academic internal medicine practice (two sites) between May 1, 2014, and April 30, 2015. We defined patient-portal use as having accessed any "active" (secure messaging, medication refill request), or "passive" (viewing labs, after visit summaries, or appointments) patient-portal function more than once over the study period. We used generalized linear models clustered on PCP to examine the odds of patient-portal use by PCP type, adjusted for patient age, gender, preferred language, race/ethnicity, insurance, and visits. Among patient-portal users, we examined the association of PCP type with "active use" utilizing the same method.
The mean patient age (n = 17,699) was 54.2 (SD 17.5), with 47.2% White, 23.6% Asian, 8.8% Black, 8.4% Latino, and 12% other/unknown. The majority (61.8%) had private insurance, and attending PCPs (76.9%). Although 72.3% enrolled in the patient-portal, only 53.4% were portal users; 40.0% were active users. There were 47 attending and 62 resident physicians. Patients with resident PCPs had lower odds of using the portal compared to those with attending PCPs (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.50-0.59). Similarly, among portal users, residents' patients had lower odds of being active users of the portal (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.87).
Given the lower patient-portal use among residents' patients, residency programs should develop curricula to bolster trainee competence in using the patient-portal for communication and to enhance the patient-physician relationship. Future research should explore additional physician factors that impact portal use.
电子患者门户有潜力增强医患沟通和健康结果,但不同的使用可能会造成或加剧差异。虽然先前的研究确定了与患者门户使用相关的患者特征,但医生因素的作用知之甚少。我们调查了具有住院医师和主治初级保健医生(PCP)的患者在使用门户方面的总体差异和模式。
这是一项在 2014 年 5 月 1 日至 2015 年 4 月 30 日期间在学术内科实践(两个地点)中接受住院医师或主治 PCP 治疗的所有已建立患者的横断面研究。我们将患者门户的使用定义为在研究期间多次访问任何“主动”(安全消息传递、药物补充请求)或“被动”(查看实验室、就诊后摘要或预约)患者门户功能。我们使用基于 PCP 的广义线性模型来检查 PCP 类型对患者使用患者门户的可能性的影响,调整了患者的年龄、性别、首选语言、种族/民族、保险和就诊情况。在患者门户用户中,我们使用相同的方法检查 PCP 类型与“主动使用”的关联。
患者的平均年龄(n=17699)为 54.2(SD 17.5),其中 47.2%为白人,23.6%为亚洲人,8.8%为黑人,8.4%为拉丁裔,12%为其他/未知。大多数(61.8%)拥有私人保险,并且有 76.9%的患者由主治 PCP 负责。尽管有 72.3%的患者注册了患者门户,但只有 53.4%的患者为门户用户;40.0%为活跃用户。有 47 名主治医生和 62 名住院医生。与主治医生相比,具有住院医生 PCP 的患者使用门户的可能性较低(OR=0.54,95%CI 0.50-0.59)。同样,在门户用户中,住院医生的患者成为门户活跃用户的可能性较低(OR=0.76,95%CI 0.68-0.87)。
鉴于住院医生患者的患者门户使用率较低,住院医师培训计划应制定课程,以提高学员使用患者门户进行沟通的能力,并增强医患关系。未来的研究应该探索影响门户使用的其他医生因素。