Firearm-Related Lead Exposure and Child Lead Levels in the United States, 2012-2018.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if firearm ownership is positively related to elevated child lead levels at a state-level, even when accounting for other sources of lead. STUDY DESIGN: For this cross-sectional ecological study, we investigated whether household firearm ownership rates (a proxy for firearm-related lead exposure) was associated with the prevalence of elevated child blood lead levels in 44 US States between 2012 and 2018. To account for potential confounding, we adjusted for other known lead exposures, poverty rate, population density, race, and calendar year. To address missing data, we used multiple imputation by chained equations. RESULTS: Prevalence of elevated child blood lead positively correlated with household firearm ownership and established predictors of lead exposure. In fully adjusted negative binomial regression models, child blood lead was positively associated with household firearm ownership and older housing; each IQR (14%) increase in household firearm ownership rate was associated with a 41% higher prevalence of childhood elevated blood lead (prevalence ratio: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.11-1.79). CONCLUSION: These data provide state-level evidence that firearms may be an important source of child lead exposure. More research is needed to substantiate this relationship and identify modifiable pathways of exposure at the individual level.

Residential greenspace and major depression among older adults living in urban and suburban areas with different climates across the United States.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Residential greenspace could alleviate depression - a leading cause of disability. Fewer studies of depression and greenspace have considered major depression, and, to our knowledge, none have considered how climate, which determines vegetation abundance and type, may change the impacts of greenspace. Our aim was to investigate whether residential greenspace is associated with major depression among older adults and explore effect modification by climate. METHODS: We used biennial interviews between 2008 and 2016 from the Health and Retirement Study. We calculated greenness within walking distance of home addresses as the maximum NDVI for the year of each participant interview averaged within a 1 km buffer. Reflecting clinical criteria, a score of ≥5 on the CIDI-SF indicated major depression in the preceding 12-months. We characterized climate using Köppen-Geiger classifications. To estimate prevalence ratios, we used Poisson regression. Our models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, geography, annual sunshine, and bluespace. RESULTS: The 21,611 eligible participants were 65 ± 10 years old on average, 55% female, 81% White, 12% Black, 10% Hispanic/Latino, and 31% had at least a 4-year college degree. The 12-month prevalence of a major depression was 8%. In adjusted models, more residential greenspace was associated with a lower prevalence of major depression (prevalence ratio per IQR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.98). There was evidence of effect modification by climate (P forinteraction, 0.062). We observed stronger associations in tropical (prevalence ratio per IQR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.01) and cold (prevalence ratio per IQR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.93) climates compared to arid (prevalence ratio per IQR 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.09) and temperate (prevalence ratio per IQR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11) climates. CONCLUSIONS: Residential greenspace may help reduce major depression. However, climate may influence how people benefit from greenspace.

Care partners reading patients' visit notes via patient portals: Characteristics and perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Care partners are key members of patients' health care teams, yet little is known about their experiences accessing patient information via electronic portals. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the characteristics and perceptions of care partners who read patients' electronic visit notes. PATIENT INVOLVEMENT: Focus groups with diverse patients from a community health center provided input into survey development. METHODS: We contacted patient portal users at 3 geographically distinct sites in the US via email in 2017 for an online survey including open ended questions which we qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Respondents chose whether to answer as care partners (N = 874) or patients (N = 28,782). Among care partner respondents, 44% were spouses, 43% children/other family members, and 14% friends/neighbors/other. Both care partners and patients reported that access to electronic notes was very important for promoting positive health behaviors, but care partners' perceptions of importance were consistently more positive than patients' perceptions of engagement behaviors. Open-ended comments included positive benefits such as: help with remembering the plan for care, coordinating care with other doctors, decreasing stress of care giving, improving efficiency of visits, and supporting patients from a geographical distance. They also offered suggestions for improving electronic portal and note experience for care partners such as having a separate log on for care partners; having doctors avoid judgmental language in their notes; and the ability to prompt needed medical care for patients. DISCUSSION: Care partners value electronic access to patients' health information even more than patients. The majority of care partners were family members, whose feedback is important for improving portal design that effectively engages these care team members. PRACTICAL VALUE: Patient care in the time of COVID-19 increasingly requires social distancing which may place additional burden on care partners supporting vulnerable patients. Access to patient notes may promote quality of care by keeping care partners informed, and care partner's input should be used to optimize portal design and electronic access to patient information.

Words Matter: What Do Patients Find Judgmental or Offensive in Outpatient Notes?

BACKGROUND: Sharing outpatient notes with patients may bring clinically important benefits, but notes may sometimes cause patients to feel judged or offended, and thereby reduce trust. OBJECTIVE: As part of a larger survey examining the effects of open notes, we sought to understand how many patients feel judged or offended due to something they read in outpatient notes, and why. DESIGN: We analyzed responses from a large Internet survey of adult patients who used secure patient portals and had at least 1 visit note available in a 12-month period at 2 large academic medical systems in Boston and Seattle, and in a rural integrated health system in Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Adult ambulatory patients with portal accounts in health systems that offered open notes for up to 7 years. APPROACH: (1) Quantitative analysis of 2 dichotomous questions, and (2) qualitative thematic analysis of free-text responses on what patients found judgmental or offensive. KEY RESULTS: Among 22,959 patient respondents who had read at least one note and answered the 2 questions, 2,411 (10.5%) reported feeling judged and/or offended by something they read in their note(s). Patients who reported poor health, unemployment, or inability to work were more likely to feel judged or offended. Among the 2,411 patients who felt judged and/or offended, 2,137 (84.5%) wrote about what prompted their feelings. Three thematic domains emerged: (1) errors and surprises, (2) labeling, and (3) disrespect. CONCLUSIONS: One in 10 respondents reported feeling judged/offended by something they read in an outpatient note due to the perception that it contained errors, surprises, labeling, or evidence of disrespect. The content and tone may be particularly important to patients in poor health. Enhanced clinician awareness of the patient perspective may promote an improved medical lexicon, reduce the transmission of bias to other clinicians, and reinforce healing relationships.

Tackling Ambulatory Safety Risks Through Patient Engagement: What 10,000 Patients and Families Say About Safety-Related Knowledge, Behaviors, and Attitudes After Reading Visit Notes.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory safety risks including delayed diagnoses or missed abnormal test results are difficult for clinicians to see, because they often occur in the space between visits. Experts advocate greater patient engagement to improve safety, but strategies are limited. Patient access to clinical notes ("OpenNotes") may help close the safety gap between visits. METHODS: We surveyed patients and families who logged on to the patient portal and had at least one ambulatory note available in the past 12 months at two academic hospitals during June to September 2016, focusing on patient-reported effects of OpenNotes on safety knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes. RESULTS: A total of 6913 (28%) of 24,722 patients at an adult hospital and 3672 (17%) of 21,579 participants at the children's hospital submitted surveys. Approximately 75% of patients and parents each reported that reading notes helped them understand the reason for both tests and referrals, and approximately 50% felt that it helped them complete tests and referrals. Roughly 75% of participants were more likely to check and understand test results. Overall, 97% of participants reported that trust in the provider, activation, patient-provider goal alignment, and teamwork were each better or the same after reading 1 note or more. Nonwhite participants and those with high school education or less were 30% to 50% more likely to report that reading notes helped them complete tests compared with white and more educated respondents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the majority of more than 10,000 patients and parents reported reading notes helped them understand and follow through on tests and referrals. As information transparency spreads, OpenNotes can help activate patients and families, facilitate safety behaviors, and forge stronger partnerships with clinicians.

Analysis of patient preferences on patient-provider interactions through the OpenNotes online portal in dermatology.

Background: Many medical centers are beginning to use OpenNotes (ON) to empower patients. However, there is a lack of literature reviewing the ON system in dermatology and any differences in attitudes between men and women. If so, it is uncertain what concerns are more important to female patients. Given the complex lexicon of notes in dermatology, the outpatient setting of dermatology practices, and the often-complex nature of treatment regimens, investigation was merited. Objective: This paper aimed to evaluate a survey of dermatologic patients on their attitudes toward the ON system. Methods: From July through October 2015, 333 dermatologic patients at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center completed an anonymous, voluntary, 25-question survey of the ON system while in the waiting room. Approximately 60% of respondents were female and 40% were male. Respondents were older, with 27% age >65 years, 21% between 56 and 65 years, 16% between 46 and 55 years, 17% between 36 and 45 years, 14% between 26 and 35 years, and 4% between 18 and 25 years. Eighty-five percent of respondents were white, and 73% had, at minimum, graduated from college. Results: Patient response to ON was positive, with 93% agreeing ON is a good idea. Of the patients who accessed their own notes (69% of respondents), 99.6% desired continued access. In addition, 85.6% of patients felt ON allowed them to control their own health, and 70% reported increased confidence in their dermatologist. Nineteen percent of respondents thought ON presented a privacy concern. Conclusion: The results showed that female patients strongly desire access to their medical records, but concerns about privacy and security exist. Preliminary analysis by a statistician did not find any statistically significant variations between men and women within the results of the survey. Due to the wide agreement in responses, it is unlikely that there are significant differences in opinion on ON between men and women.

Validation of a brief scale to assess ambulatory patients' perceptions of reading visit notes: a scale development study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate the validity of a scale to assess patients' perceived benefits and risks of reading ambulatory visit notes online (open notes). DESIGN: Four studies were used to evaluate the construct validity of a benefits and risks scale. Study 1 refined the items; study 2 evaluated underlying factor structure and identified the items; study 3 evaluated study 2 results in a separate sample; and study 4 examined factorial invariance of the developed scale across educational subsamples. SETTING: Ambulatory care in three large health systems in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Participants in three US health systems who responded to one of two online surveys asking about benefits and risks of reading visit notes: a psychometrics survey of primary care patients, and a large general survey of patients across all ambulatory specialties. Sample sizes: n=439 (study 1); n=439 (study 2); n=500 (study 3); and n=250 (study 4). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaire items about patients' perceived benefits and risks of reading online visit notes. RESULTS: Study 1 resulted in the selection of a 10-point importance response option format over a 4-point agreement scale. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in study 2 resulted in two-factor solution: a four-item benefits factor with good reliability (alpha=0.83) and a three-item risks factor with poor reliability (alpha=0.52). The factor structure was confirmed in study 3, and confirmatory factor analysis of benefit items resulted in an excellent fitting model, X2(2)=2.949; confirmatory factor index=0.998; root mean square error of approximation=0.04 (0.00, 0.142); loadings 0.68-0.86; alpha=0.88. Study 4 supported configural, measurement and structural invariance for the benefits scale across high and low-education patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the four-item benefits scale has excellent construct validity and preliminary evidence of generalising across different patient populations. Further scale development is needed to understand perceived risks of reading open notes.

Frequency and Types of Patient-Reported Errors in Electronic Health Record Ambulatory Care Notes.

Importance: As health information transparency increases, patients more often seek their health data. More than 44 million patients in the US can now readily access their ambulatory visit notes online, and the practice is increasing abroad. Few studies have assessed documentation errors that patients identify in their notes and how these may inform patient engagement and safety strategies. Objective: To assess the frequency and types of errors identified by patients who read open ambulatory visit notes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this survey study, a total of 136 815 patients at 3 US health care organizations with open notes, including 79 academic and community ambulatory care practices, received invitations to an online survey from June 5 to October 20, 2017. Patients who had at least 1 ambulatory note and had logged onto the portal at least once in the past 12 months were included. Data analysis was performed from July 3, 2018, to April 27, 2020. Exposures: Access to ambulatory care open notes through patient portals for up to 7 years (2010-2017). Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patients reporting a mistake and how serious they perceived the mistake to be, factors associated with finding errors characterized by patients as serious, and categories of patient-reported errors. Results: Of 136 815 patients who received survey invitations, 29 656 (21.7%) responded and 22 889 patients (mean [SD] age, 55.16 [15.96] years; 14 447 [63.1%] female; 18 301 [80.0%] white) read 1 or more notes in the past 12 months and completed error questions. Of these patients, 4830 (21.1%) reported a perceived mistake and 2043 (42.3%) reported that the mistake was serious (somewhat serious: 1563 [32.4%]; very serious: 480 [9.9%]). In multivariable analysis, female patients (relative risk [RR], 1.79; 95% CI, 1.72-1.85), more educated patients (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.29-1.48), sicker patients (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.84-1.94), those aged 45 to 64 years (RR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.06-2.42), those 65 years or older (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.73-2.32), and those who read more than 1 note (2-3 notes: RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47; ≥4 notes: RR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.02-4.73) were more likely to report a mistake that they found to be serious compared with their reference groups. After categorization of patient-reported very serious mistakes, those specifically mentioning the word diagnosis or describing a specific error in current or past diagnoses were most common (98 of 356 [27.5%]), followed by inaccurate medical history (85 of 356 [23.9%]), medications or allergies (50 of 356 [14.0%]), and tests, procedures, or results (30 of 356 [8.4%]). A total of 23 (6.5%) reflected notes reportedly written on the wrong patient. Of 433 very serious errors, 255 (58.9%) included at least 1 perceived error potentially associated with the diagnostic process (eg, history, physical examination, tests, referrals, and communication). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients who read ambulatory notes online perceived mistakes, a substantial proportion of which they found to be serious. Older and sicker patients were twice as likely to report a serious error compared with younger and healthier patients, indicating important safety and quality implications. Sharing notes with patients may help engage them to improve record accuracy and health care safety together with practitioners.

Correction: OpenNotes After 7 Years: Patient Experiences With Ongoing Access to Their Clinicians' Outpatient Visit Notes.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/13876.].

Later emergency provider shift hour is associated with increased risk of admission: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding factors that drive admissions is critical to containing cost and optimising hospital operations. We hypothesised that, due to multiple factors, emergency physicians would be more likely to admit a patient seen later in their shift. METHODS: Retrospective study examining all patient visits at a large academic hospital from July 2010 to July 2016. Patients with missing data (n=191) were excluded. 294 031 emergency department (ED) visits were included in the final analysis. The exposure of interest was the time during the shift at which a patient was first evaluated by the clinician, and outcome was hospital admission. We used a generalised estimating equation with physician as the clustering level to adjust for patient age, gender, Emergency Severity Index (ESI, 1=most severe illness, 5=least severe illness) and 24 hours clock time. We also conducted a stratified analysis by three ESI categories. RESULTS: From the 294 031 ED visits, 5977 were seen in the last hour of the shift. Of patients seen in the last shift hour, 43% were admitted versus 39% seen at any other time during the shift. There was a significant association between being evaluated in the last hour (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06) and last quarter (RR 1.02, 1.01 to 1.03) of shift and the likelihood of admission. Patients with an ESI Score of 4-5 saw the largest effect sizes (RR 1.62, 0.996-2.635 for last hour and RR 1.24, 0.996-1.535 for last quarter) but these were not statistically significant. Additionally, there was a trend towards increased likelihood of admission later in shift; the relative risk of admission was 1.04 in hour 6, (1.02-1.05), 1.03 in hour 7 (1.01-1.05), 1.04 in hour 8 (1.01-1.06) and 1.06 in hour 9 (1.013-1.101). CONCLUSIONS: There is a small but significant association between a patient being evaluated later in an emergency physician's shift and their likelihood of being admitted to the hospital.

A patient and family reporting system for perceived ambulatory note mistakes: experience at 3 U.S. healthcare centers.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to test a patient and family online reporting system for perceived ambulatory visit note inaccuracies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We implemented a patient and family electronic reporting system at 3 U.S. healthcare centers: a northeast urban academic adult medical center (AD), a northeast urban academic pediatric medical center (PED), and a southeast nonprofit hospital network (NET). Patients and families reported potential documentation inaccuracies after reading primary care and subspecialty visit notes. Results were characterized using descriptive statistics and coded for clinical relevance. RESULTS: We received 1440 patient and family reports (780 AD, 402 PED, and 258 NET), and 27% of the reports identified a potential inaccuracy (25% AD, 35% PED, 28% NET). Among these, patients and families indicated that the potential inaccuracy was important or very important in 58% of reports (55% AD, 55% PED, 71% NET). The most common types of potential inaccuracies included description of symptoms (21%), past medical problems (21%), medications (18%), and important information that was missing (15%). Most patient- and family-reported inaccuracies resulted in a change to care or to the medical record (55% AD, 67% PED, data not available at NET). DISCUSSION: About one-quarter of patients and families using an online reporting system identified potential documentation inaccuracies in visit notes and more than half were considered important by patients and clinicians, underscoring the potential role of patients and families as ambulatory safety partners. CONCLUSIONS: Partnering with patients and families to obtain reports on inaccuracies in visit notes may contribute to safer care. Mechanisms to encourage greater use of patient and family reporting systems are needed.

An Opportunity to Engage Obstetrics and Gynecology Patients Through Shared Visit Notes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess obstetrics and gynecology patients' interest in reading their ambulatory visit notes, identification of documentation errors, and perceptions of sensitive language through a quality improvement (QI) initiative. METHODS: Beginning April 2016, as part of a QI project all obstetrics and gynecology patients (except family planning) were invited to read their ambulatory visit notes and provide feedback using a patient reporting tool codeveloped with patients. Two physicians with safety expertise reviewed all patient-reported errors over the first 16 months. RESULTS: Among obstetrics and gynecology patients with an active portal account and an available note, 6,594 of 9,550 (69%) read at least one note. Two hundred twelve (3.2%) patients used the electronic reporting tool, submitting a total of 232 reports, in a "natural" environment with no advertisement, incentives, or clinician encouragement. In total, 94% felt they understood the notes, 95% understood the next steps in the care plan, and 92% felt the notes accurately described their visit. Of all reports, 27% of patients identified inaccuracies in the notes, including descriptions of symptoms (29%); family history (21%); medications (15%); health problems (15%); social history and physical examination, including elements that were reportedly documented but not performed (each 11%). Patients rated inaccuracies as important in 58% of reports, and, on clinician review, 75% of patient-reported mistakes had the potential to affect care. Among all reports, 7% of patients indicated bothersome words. More than half (56%) of patients included voluntary positive feedback such as appreciation for the health care provider, reassurance from notes, greater visit recall and care plan adherence, and positive effects on the patient-doctor relationship. DISCUSSION: Obstetrics and gynecology patients are interested in reading notes, which can promote engagement and safety. Few patients provided feedback, but those who did identified documentation inaccuracies in about one quarter of reports; the majority were relevant to care. Greater outreach and patient encouragement are needed to further engage patients in safety.

OpenNotes After 7 Years: Patient Experiences With Ongoing Access to Their Clinicians' Outpatient Visit Notes.

BACKGROUND: Following a 2010-2011 pilot intervention in which a limited sample of primary care doctors offered their patients secure Web-based portal access to their office visit notes, the participating sites expanded OpenNotes to nearly all clinicians in primary care, medical, and surgical specialty practices. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the ongoing experiences and perceptions of patients who read ambulatory visit notes written by a broad range of doctors, nurses, and other clinicians. METHODS: A total of 3 large US health systems in Boston, Seattle, and rural Pennsylvania conducted a Web-based survey of adult patients who used portal accounts and had at least 1 visit note available in a recent 12-month period. The main outcome measures included patient-reported behaviors and their perceptions concerning benefits versus risks. RESULTS: Among 136,815 patients who received invitations, 21.68% (29,656/136,815) responded. Of the 28,782 patient respondents, 62.82% (18,081/28,782) were female, 72.90% (20,982/28,782) were aged 45 years or older, 76.94% (22,146/28,782) were white, and 14.30% (4115/28,782) reported fair or poor health. Among the 22,947 who reported reading 1 or more notes, 3 out of 4 reported reading them for 1 year or longer, half reported reading at least 4 notes, and 37.74% (8588/22,753) shared a note with someone else. Patients rated note reading as very important for helping take care of their health (16,354/22,520, 72.62%), feeling in control of their care (15,726/22,515, 69.85%), and remembering the plan of care (14,821/22,516, 65.82%). Few were very confused (737/22,304, 3.3%) or more worried (1078/22,303, 4.83%) after reading notes. About a third reported being encouraged by their clinicians to read notes and a third told their clinicians they had read them. Less educated, nonwhite, older, and Hispanic patients, and individuals who usually did not speak English at home, were those most likely to report major benefits from note reading. Nearly all respondents (22,593/22,947, 98.46%) thought Web-based access to visit notes a good idea, and 62.38% (13,427/21,525) rated this practice as very important for choosing a future provider. CONCLUSIONS: In this first large-scale survey of patient experiences with a broad range of clinicians working in practices in which shared notes are well established, patients find note reading very important for their health management and share their notes frequently with others. Patients are rarely troubled by what they read, and those traditionally underserved in the United States report particular benefit. However, fewer than half of clinicians and patients actively address their shared notes during visits. As the practice continues to spread rapidly in the United States and internationally, our findings indicate that OpenNotes brings benefits to patients that largely outweigh the risks.

Ambient Pollutants and Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Greater Boston.

Background and Purpose- Associations between exposures to ambient air pollution and spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) have been inconsistent, and data on stroke subtypes are currently limited. Methods- We obtained information on all cases of deep or lobar hematomas from ICH patients who were admitted to the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, MA, between 2006 and 2011. We linked the date of admission with 1- to 7-day moving averages of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), black carbon, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone from area monitors. We conducted time-stratified bidirectional case-crossover analyses to assess associations between pollutants and stroke. We also investigated whether associations differed by hemorrhage location and type. Results- There were 577 cases of ICH (295 deep, 282 lobar). Overall, there was no evidence of elevated ICH risk after increases in PM2.5, black carbon, or nitrogen dioxide in the whole population. However, there was suggestion of heightened risk with higher levels of ozone for averages longer than 1 day although CIs were wide. In models stratified by ICH location, associations with ozone remained positive for patients with lobar (3-day moving average odds ratio, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.18-2.22) but not deep ICH (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.20). Larger estimates were observed among participants with a probable diagnosis of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.25-3.96). Conclusions- Exposure to ozone may be associated with incidence of lobar ICH, especially among those who have confirmed or probable cerebral amyloid angiopathy.

Housing Quality and Mental Health: the Association between Pest Infestation and Depressive Symptoms among Public Housing Residents.

Housing quality, which includes structural and environmental risks, has been associated with multiple physical health outcomes including injury and asthma. Cockroach and mouse infestations can be prime manifestations of diminished housing quality. While the respiratory health effects of pest infestation are well documented, little is known about the association between infestation and mental health outcomes. To address this gap in knowledge and given the potential to intervene to reduce pest infestation, we assessed the association between household pest infestation and symptoms of depression among public housing residents. We conducted a cross-sectional study in 16 Boston Housing Authority (BHA) developments from 2012 to 2014 in Boston, Massachusetts. Household units were randomly selected and one adult (n = 461) from each unit was surveyed about depressive symptoms using the Center for Epidemiologic Study-Depression (CES-D) Scale, and about pest infestation and management practices. In addition, a home inspection for pests was performed. General linear models were used to model the association between pest infestation and high depressive symptoms. After adjusting for important covariates, individuals who lived in homes with current cockroach infestation had almost three times the odds of experiencing high depressive symptoms (adjusted OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.4) than those without infestation. Dual infestation (cockroach and mouse) was associated with over five times the odds (adjusted odds = 5.1, 95% CI 3.0-8.5) of experiencing high depressive symptoms. Using a robust measure of cockroach and mouse infestation, and a validated depression screener, we identified associations between current infestation and depressive symptoms. Although the temporal directionality of this association remains uncertain, these findings suggest that the health impact of poor housing conditions extend beyond physical health to include mental health. The study adds important information to the growing body of evidence that housing contributes to population health and improvements in population health may not be possible without addressing deficiencies in the housing infrastructure.

OpenNotes and shared decision making: a growing practice in clinical transparency and how it can support patient-centered care.

Objective: Prior studies suggest inviting patients to read their visit notes (OpenNotes) has important benefits for patient engagement. We utilized survey data to investigate our hypothesis that patients who read more notes would report greater shared decision making (SDM). Materials and Methods: Our survey focused on the safety and quality implications of OpenNotes. 24 722 patients at an urban healthcare organization were invited to complete the survey, which included an item assessing the number of notes read and the CollaboRATE scale to measure SDM. We used log-binomial regression to estimate the relative probability of top CollaboRATE scores across number of notes read while controlling for several covariates. Results: 6913 patients responded (28% response rate). Patients reading 4+ clinical notes in the past 12 months were 17% more likely to have top CollaboRATE scores when compared to patients who had not read a note in the previous 12 months (RR: 1.17, 95%CI: 1.04-1.32). Discussion: There is a clear relationship between what SDM requires and the transparency OpenNotes provides. Access to clinicians' notes can support the SDM model, which relies on efficient information exchange between clinicians and well-informed patients. Conclusion: Our study showed evidence of a relationship between note reading and perceived SDM. Implementation of SDM is likely to expand, given its association with improved patient satisfaction, adherence, and medical decision making. Findings from this study highlight OpenNotes as a policy that institutions can implement as a facilitator of SDM and a manifestation of their commitment to patient autonomy and transparency.

Open Notes in Teaching Clinics: A Multisite Survey of Residents to Identify Anticipated Attitudes and Guidance for Programs.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians are increasingly sharing outpatient visit notes with patients through electronic portals. These open notes may bring about new educational opportunities as well as concerns to physicians-in-training and residency programs. OBJECTIVE: We assessed anticipatory attitudes about open notes and explored factors influencing residents' propensity toward note transparency. METHODS: Residents in primary care clinics at 4 teaching hospitals were surveyed prior to implementation of open notes. Main measures included resident attitudes toward open notes and the anticipated effect on patients, resident workload, and education. Data were stratified by site. RESULTS: A total of 176 of 418 (42%) residents responded. Most residents indicated open notes would improve patient engagement, trust, and education but worried about overwhelming patients, residents being less candid, and workload. More than half of residents thought open notes were a good idea, and 32% (56 of 176) indicated they would encourage patients to read these notes. More than half wanted note-writing education and more feedback, and 72% (126 of 175) indicated patient feedback on residents' notes could improve communication skills. Attitudes about effects of open notes on safety, quality, trust, and medical education varied by site. CONCLUSIONS: Residents reported mixed feelings about the anticipated effects of sharing clinical notes with patients. They advocate for patient feedback on notes, yet worry about workload, supervision, and errors. Training site was correlated with many attitudes, suggesting local culture drives resident support for open notes. Strategies that address resident concerns and promote teaching and feedback related to notes may be helpful.

The Importance of Visit Notes on Patient Portals for Engaging Less Educated or Nonwhite Patients: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: OpenNotes, a national initiative to share clinicians' visit notes with patients, can improve patient engagement, but effects on vulnerable populations are not known very well. OBJECTIVE: Our aim is to examine the importance of visit notes to nonwhite and less educated patients. METHODS: Patients at an urban academic medical center with an active patient portal account and ≥1 available ambulatory visit note over the prior year were surveyed during June 2016 until September 2016. The survey was designed with patients and families and assessed importance of reading notes (scale 0-10) for (1) understanding health conditions, (2) feeling informed about care, (3) understanding the provider's thought process, (4) remembering the plan of care, and (5) making decisions about care. We compared the proportion of patients reporting 9-10 (extremely important) for each item stratified by education level, race/ethnicity, and self-reported health. Principal component analysis and correlation measures supported a summary score for the 5 items (Cronbach alpha=.93). We examined factors associated with rating notes as extremely important to engage in care using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 24,722 patients, 6913 (27.96%) completed the survey. The majority (6736/6913, 97.44%) read at least one note. Among note readers, 74.0% (727/982) of patients with ≤high school education, 70.7% (130/184) of black patients, and 69.9% (153/219) of Hispanic/Latino patients reported that notes are extremely important to feel informed about their care. The majority of less educated and nonwhite patients reported notes as extremely important to remember the care plan (62.4%, 613/982 ≤high school education; 62.0%, 114/184 black patients; and 61.6%, 135/219 Hispanic/Latino patients) and to make care decisions (62.3%, 612/982; 59.8%, 110/184; and 58.5%, 128/219, respectively, and P<.003 for all comparisons to more educated and white patients, respectively). Among patients with the poorest self-reported health, 65.9% (499/757) found notes extremely important to be informed and to understand the provider. On multivariable modeling, less educated patients were nearly three times as likely to report notes were extremely important to engage in care compared with the most educated patients (odds ratio [OR] 2.9, 95% CI 2.4-3.3). Nonwhite patients were twice as likely to report the same compared with white patients (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.7 [black] and OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-2.9 [Hispanic/Latino and Asian], P<.001 for each comparison). Healthier patients, women, older patients, and those who read more notes were more likely to find notes extremely important to engage in care. CONCLUSIONS: Less educated and nonwhite patients using the portal each assigned higher importance to reading notes for several health behaviors than highly educated and white patients, and may find transparent notes especially valuable for understanding their health and engaging in their care. Facilitating access to notes may improve engagement in health care for some vulnerable populations who have historically been more challenging to reach.

Empowering Informal Caregivers with Health Information: OpenNotes as a Safety Strategy.

BACKGROUND: Enabling family/friend caregivers with access to visit notes may help avoid errors, delayed diagnoses, or other ambulatory safety risks. Patient, parent, and caregiver perceptions of how shared notes affect safety behaviors and attitudes were studied in an exploratory study. METHODS: To assess the impact of OpenNotes on safety, 24,722 patients with active portal accounts and ≥ 1 available visit notes during the prior year at an urban hospital were surveyed between June and September 2016. Surveys were sent to patient portal accounts, and respondents designated themselves as patients or caregivers. Although the hospital does not have formal proxy portal registration, some patients share access with their caregivers. RESULTS: Of 24,722 portal accounts accessed during the study, 7,058 (28.5%) surveys were returned, with 150 (2.1%) participants identified as caregivers. Among patients who had tests and referrals, reading notes helped caregivers understand the reason for the test (96/120 [80.0%]) or referral (48/52 [92.3%]), remember to get patient tests done (66/120 [55.0%]), check (98/120 [81.7%]) and understand (98/120 [81.7%]) results, and remember patient appointments (36/52 [69.2%]). As a result of reading notes, 54.1% (59/109) of caregivers helping patients on prescription medications reported better assisting patients to take them correctly. Among note-reading caregivers, 53.7% (n = 72/134) trusted the clinician more (44.8% no change), and 58.2% (n = 78/134) reported better teamwork (41.0% no change) as a result of open notes. In total, 30.3% (n = 40/132) reported at least one mistake or possible mistake in the patient's notes. Finding a possible mistake did not negatively affect trust or teamwork. CONCLUSION: OpenNotes may enable caregivers with patient health information, answering the call to better support this critical group in the health care system and to engage patients and families in safety efforts.