Suppr超能文献

患者参与就诊记录:OurNotes 的混合方法评估。

Patients Contributing to Visit Notes: Mixed Methods Evaluation of OurNotes.

机构信息

Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, United States.

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2021 Nov 8;23(11):e29951. doi: 10.2196/29951.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Secure patient portals are widely available, and patients use them to view their electronic health records, including their clinical notes. We conducted experiments asking them to cogenerate notes with their clinicians, an intervention called OurNotes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess patient and provider experiences and attitudes after 12 months of a pilot intervention.

METHODS

Before scheduled primary care visits, patients were asked to submit a word-constrained, unstructured interval history and an agenda for what they would like to discuss at the visit. Using site-specific methods, their providers were invited to incorporate the submissions into notes documenting the visits. Sites served urban, suburban, and rural patients in primary care practices in 4 academic health centers in Boston (Massachusetts), Lebanon (New Hampshire), Denver (Colorado), and Seattle (Washington). Each practice offered electronic access to visit notes (open notes) to its patients for several years. A mixed methods evaluation used tracking data and electronic survey responses from patients and clinicians. Participants were 174 providers and 1962 patients who submitted at least 1 previsit form. We asked providers about the usefulness of the submissions, effects on workflow, and ideas for the future. We asked patients about difficulties and benefits of providing the requested information and ideas for future improvements.

RESULTS

Forms were submitted before 9.15% (5365/58,652) eligible visits, and 43.7% (76/174) providers and 26.76% (525/1962) patients responded to the postintervention evaluation surveys; 74 providers and 321 patients remembered receiving and completing the forms and answered the survey questions. Most clinicians thought interim patient histories (69/74, 93%) and patient agendas (72/74, 97%) as good ideas, 70% (52/74) usually or always incorporated them into visit notes, 54% (40/74) reported no change in visit length, and 35% (26/74) thought they saved time. Their most common suggestions related to improving notifications when patient forms were received, making it easier to find the form and insert it into the note, and educating patients about how best to prepare their submissions. Patient respondents were generally well educated, most found the history (259/321, 80.7%) and agenda (286/321, 89.1%) questions not difficult to answer; more than 92.2% (296/321) thought sending answers before the visit a good idea; 68.8% (221/321) thought the questions helped them prepare for the visit. Common suggestions by patients included learning to write better answers and wanting to know that their submissions were read by their clinicians. At the end of the pilot, all participating providers chose to continue the OurNotes previsit form, and sites considered expanding the intervention to more clinicians and adapting it for telemedicine visits.

CONCLUSIONS

OurNotes interests patients, and providers experience it as a positive intervention. Participation by patients, care partners, clinicians, and electronic health record experts will facilitate further development.

摘要

背景

安全的患者门户广泛可用,患者可以使用这些门户查看他们的电子健康记录,包括他们的临床记录。我们进行了实验,要求他们与临床医生共同生成记录,这一干预措施被称为 OurNotes。

目的

本研究旨在评估试点干预 12 个月后患者和医务人员的体验和态度。

方法

在计划中的初级保健就诊前,患者被要求提交一份受单词限制的非结构化间隔病史和他们希望在就诊中讨论的议程。使用特定于站点的方法,邀请他们的提供者将提交内容纳入记录就诊的记录中。这些站点在波士顿(马萨诸塞州)、黎巴嫩(新罕布什尔州)、丹佛(科罗拉多州)和西雅图(华盛顿州)的 4 个学术医疗中心的初级保健实践中为城市、郊区和农村患者提供服务。每个实践都为患者提供了几年的访问记录(开放记录)的电子访问权限。采用混合方法评估,使用患者和医务人员的跟踪数据和电子调查回复。参与者为 174 名提供者和 1962 名提交至少 1 份就诊前表格的患者。我们询问提供者有关提交内容的有用性、对工作流程的影响以及对未来的想法。我们询问患者提供所要求信息的困难和益处,以及对未来改进的想法。

结果

在符合条件的 9.15%(5365/58652)次就诊前提交了表格,74 名提供者中的 43.7%(76/174)和 1962 名患者中的 26.76%(52/1962)回复了干预后评估调查;74 名提供者中的 74 名(74/74,93%)和 321 名患者中的 321 名(321/321,100%)记住收到并完成了表格并回答了调查问题。大多数临床医生认为临时患者病史(69/74,93%)和患者议程(72/74,97%)是好主意,70%(52/74)通常或总是将其纳入就诊记录,54%(40/74)报告就诊时间没有变化,35%(26/74)认为这样节省了时间。他们最常见的建议与改善收到患者表格时的通知、使找到表格并将其插入记录更容易,以及教育患者如何最好地准备提交内容有关。患者受访者普遍受过良好教育,大多数人发现病史(259/321,80.7%)和议程(286/321,89.1%)问题不难回答;超过 92.2%(296/321)的人认为在就诊前发送答案是个好主意;68.8%(221/321)的人认为这些问题有助于他们为就诊做准备。患者的常见建议包括学习如何更好地回答问题,并希望知道他们的提交内容已被其临床医生阅读。在试点结束时,所有参与的提供者都选择继续使用 OurNotes 就诊前表格,并且各站点正在考虑将该干预措施扩展到更多的临床医生,并为远程医疗就诊对其进行调整。

结论

OurNotes 使患者感兴趣,并且提供者认为这是一种积极的干预措施。患者、护理伙伴、临床医生和电子健康记录专家的参与将促进进一步发展。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Actualizing Better Health And Health Care For Older Adults.实现老年人更好的健康和医疗保健。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Feb;40(2):219-225. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01470. Epub 2021 Jan 21.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验