Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26123340›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016

Rapid growth in surgeons' use of secure messaging in a patient portal.

Jared A Shenson, Robert M Cronin, Sharon E Davis, Qingxia Chen, Gretchen Purcell Jackson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Physicians' electronic inbox work patterns and factors associated with high inbox work duration.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jared A ShensonSchool of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. jared.shenson@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7751-7508
Robert M CroninDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Sharon E DavisDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Qingxia ChenDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Gretchen Purcell JacksonDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

Vanderbilt Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007450 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jessica S. Ancker, Bradley A. Malin · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM007450-12NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUse of secure messaging through patient portals has risen substantially in recent years due to provider incentives and consumer demand. Secure messaging may increase patient satisfaction and improve outcomes, but also adds to physician workload. Most prior studies of secure messaging focused on primary care and medical specialties. We examined surgeons' use of secure messaging and the contribution of messaging to outpatient interactions in a broadly deployed patient portal.

methodsWe determined the number of clinic visits and secure messages for surgical providers in the first 3 years (2008-2010) after patient portal deployment at an academic medical center. We calculated the proportion of outpatient interaction conducted through messaging for each specialty. Logistic regression models compared the likelihood of message-based versus clinic outpatient interaction across surgical specialties.

resultsOver the study period, surgical providers delivered care in 648,200 clinic visits and received 83,912 messages, with more than 200% growth in monthly message volume. Surgical specialties receiving the most messages were orthopedics/podiatry (25.1%), otolaryngology (20.1%), urology (10.8%), and general surgery (9.6%); vascular surgery (0.8%) and pediatric general surgery (0.2%) received the fewest. The proportion of outpatient interactions conducted through secure messaging increased significantly from 5.4% in 2008 to 15.3% in 2010 (p < 0.001) with all specialties experiencing growth. Heart/lung transplantation (74.9%), liver/kidney/pancreas transplantation (69.5%), and general surgery (48.7%) had the highest proportion of message-based outpatient interaction by the end of the study.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates rapid adoption of online secure messaging across surgical specialties with significant growth in its use for outpatient interaction. Some specialties, particularly those with long-term follow-up, interacted with patients more through secure messaging than in person. As surgeons devote more time to secure messaging, additional research will be needed to understand the care delivered through online interactions and to develop models for reimbursement.

Indexed as

SurgeonsAdultAmbulatory CareConsumer Health InformationElectronic Health RecordsElectronic MailFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionYoung AdultConsumer health informaticsPatient engagementPatient portalPatient–provider communicationSecure messagingSurgery

Identifiers

PMID26123340
PMCPMC4881849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.