Effects of Patient Portal Use on Patient Satisfaction: Survey and Partial Least Squares Analysis.

BACKGROUND: With digital delivery of health care services gaining prominence, patient portals have become a mainstay of many health care organizations. Despite the importance of patient portals, inconclusive data exist regarding the effect of patient portal use on patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand the relationship between the postadoptive use of patient portals and patient satisfaction outcomes. METHODS: Postadoptive use of patient portals has a positive relationship with the 3 dimensions of patient satisfaction, mediated by gratification, health self-awareness, and health perceptions. A total of 504 valid patient portal user responses were collected, and partial least squares analysis was performed to analyze the data. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction was captured using three dimensions: care team interaction, atmosphere, and instruction effectiveness. The results show that postadoptive use of patient portals has a positive influence on all 3 dimensions of patient satisfaction through the mediating variables of gratification, health self-awareness, and health perceptions. Specifically, postadoptive use had significant positive influence on gratification, health self-awareness, and health perceptions. Each of the 3 patient perceptions had significant positive influence on all 3 dimensions of patient satisfaction: care team interaction, atmosphere, and instruction effectiveness. Specifically, our model explained 31.8% of the care team interaction, 40.6% of the atmosphere, and 39.1% of the instruction effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Our model shows that patient portal use can influence patient satisfaction through the mediating effects of gratification, health self-awareness, and health perception. Patient satisfaction is an important outcome for health care organizations. Therefore, by promoting effective patient portal use and fostering patient perceptions, health care organizations can improve patient satisfaction.

Unfulfilled promises of health information exchange: What inhibits ambulatory clinics from electronically sharing health information?

PURPOSE: This study seeks to understand the key inhibitors for health information exchange (HIE) by ambulatory (outpatient) clinics. We examine the key technological, organizational and environmental factors that inhibit an ambulatory clinic from electronically exchanging health information with external clinics and hospitals. METHODS: We utilize survey data from 1285 ambulatory clinics in the US state of Minnesota. Using logistic regressions, we assess if the ambulatory clinic's HIE with external clinics and external hospitals are associated with fourteen inhibitors from technological, organizational and environmental contexts in which ambulatory clinics operate. RESULTS: Among the technological inhibitors, we find lack of adequate technological infrastructure, difficulties in integrating external data with electronic medical record systems, and security concerns to inhibit ambulatory clinics' HIE with both clinics and hospitals. Inadequate technical support was a barrier for HIE with hospitals, whereas inadequate training of staff was an inhibitor for clinic-to-clinic HIE. Of the environmental variables, legal concerns and complexity in framing HIE agreements with partners were found to inhibit ambulatory clinics' HIE with both external clinics and hospitals. Lack of partner readiness and ability was an inhibiting factor for clinic-to-hospital HIE whereas issues in patient consent, and problems in choosing the right vendor with a good fit were inhibiting ambulatory clinics' HIE with other clinics. Among the organizational variables, lack of adequate senior leadership support and complexity of workflow changes inhibited clinic-to-clinic health data sharing, whereas unclear return on investment (ROI) for HIE was a deterrent for ambulatory clinics' HIE with hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: This study throws light on electronic HIE practices and its key inhibitors in ambulatory clinics, an understudied area in digital health. This paper provides unique insights into specific inhibitors that deter clinic-to-clinic health information sharing versus those that affect and clinic-to-hospital health information exchange.

Error rates in physician dictation: quality assurance and medical record production.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the paper is to determine the instance of errors made in physician dictation of medical records. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Purposive sampling method was employed to select medical transcriptionists (MTs) as "experts" to identify the frequency and types of medical errors in dictation files. Seventy-nine MTs examined 2,391 dictation files during one standard work day, and used a common template to record errors. FINDINGS: The results demonstrated that on the average, on the order of 315,000 errors in one million dictations were surfaced. This shows that medical errors occur in dictation, and quality assurance measures are needed in dealing with those errors. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: There was no potential for inter-coder reliability and confirming the error codes assigned by individual MTs. This study only examined the presence of errors in the dictation-transcription model. Finally, the project was done with the cooperation of MTSOs and transcription industry organizations. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Anecdotal evidence points to the belief that records created directly by physicians alone will have fewer errors and thus be more accurate. This research demonstrates this is not necessarily the case when it comes to physician dictation. As a result, the place of quality assurance in the medical record production workflow needs to be carefully considered before implementing a "once-and-done" (i.e. physician-based) model of record creation. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: No other research has been published on the presence of errors or classification of errors in physician dictation. The paper questions the assumption that direct physician creation of medical records in the absence of secondary QA processes will result in higher quality documentation and fewer medical errors.