Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34435960›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2021

Implementation of Patient Engagement Tools in Electronic Health Records to Enhance Patient-Centered Communication: Protocol for Feasibility Evaluation and Preliminary Results.

Ming Tai-Seale, Rebecca Rosen, Bernice Ruo, Michael Hogarth, Christopher A Longhurst, Lina Lander, Amanda L Walker, Cheryl D Stults, Albert Chan, Kathleen Mazor and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03385512 (Improving Patient-Centered Communication in Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03385512 nacompletednot on this map

Improving Patient-Centered Communication in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of the Comparative Effectiveness of Three Interventions

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San DiegoRan2018 to 2022Enrolled5,565ConditionsPatient Engagement, Physician's Role, Physician-Patient Relations, Patient ActivationArmsOPEN High Touch, OPEN High Tech, ASK Poster in Exam Rooms
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

12 authors.

Ming Tai-SealeDepartment of Family Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9272-066X
Rebecca RosenDepartment of Family Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6580-8324
Bernice RuoDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7924-0821
Michael HogarthDivision of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4264-1258
Christopher A LonghurstDivision of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4908-6856
Lina LanderDepartment of Family Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6180-223X
Amanda L WalkerDepartment of Family Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5777-6684
Cheryl D StultsPalo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7958-1511
Albert ChanSutter Health Center for Health Systems Research, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4972-5569
Kathleen MazorDepartment of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9491-9872
Lawrence GarberMeyers Primary Care Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Reliant Medical Group, and Fallon Health, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1500-5421
Marlene MillenDivision of Biomedical Informatics, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2671-5755

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-physician communication during clinical encounters is essential to ensure quality of care. Many studies have attempted to improve patient-physician communication. Incorporating patient priorities into agenda setting and medical decision-making are fundamental to patient-centered communication. Efficient and scalable approaches are needed to empower patients to speak up and prepare physicians to respond. Leveraging electronic health records (EHRs) in engaging patients and health care teams has the potential to enhance the integration of patient priorities in clinical encounters. A systematic approach to eliciting and documenting patient priorities before encounters could facilitate effective communication in such encounters.

objectiveIn this paper, we report the design and implementation of a set of EHR tools built into clinical workflows for facilitating patient-physician joint agenda setting and the documentation of patient concerns in the EHRs for ambulatory encounters.

methodsWe engaged health information technology leaders and users in three health care systems for developing and implementing a set of EHR tools. The goal of these tools is to standardize the elicitation of patient priorities by using a previsit "patient important issue" questionnaire distributed through the patient portal to the EHR. We built additional EHR documentation tools to facilitate patient-staff communication when the staff records the vital signs and the reason for the visit in the EHR while in the examination room, with a simple transmission method for physicians to incorporate patient concerns in EHR notes.

resultsThe study is ongoing. The anticipated completion date for survey data collection is November 2021. A total of 34,037 primary care patients from three health systems (n=26,441; n=5136; and n=2460 separately recruited from each system) used the previsit patient important issue questionnaire in 2020. The adoption of the digital previsit questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic was much higher in one health care system because it expanded the use of the questionnaire from physicians participating in trials to all primary care providers midway through the year. It also required the use of this previsit questionnaire for eCheck-ins, which are required for telehealth encounters. Physicians and staff suggested anecdotally that this questionnaire helped patient-clinician communication, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

conclusionsEHR tools have the potential to facilitate the integration of patient priorities into agenda setting and documentation in real-world primary care practices. Early results suggest the feasibility and acceptability of such digital tools in three health systems. EHR tools can support patient engagement and clinicians' work during in-person and telehealth visits. They could potentially exert a sustained influence on patient and clinician communication behaviors in contrast to prior ad hoc educational efforts targeting patients or clinicians.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03385512; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385512. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30431.

Indexed as

agenda settingdigital healthelectronic health recordelectronic health record documentationhealth care teamspatient engagementpatient–physician communicationpatient portalpatient prioritiesstandard work

Identifiers

PMID34435960
PMCPMC8430844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.