Background When older adults return home from geriatric rehabilitation in a hospital, remembering the plethora of medical advice and medical instructions provided can be overwhelming for them and for their caregivers. Objective The overall objective was to develop and test the feasibility of a novel web-based application called MyPath to Home that can be used to manage the personalized needs of geriatric rehabilitation patients during their transition from the hospital to home. Methods This study involved (1) co-designing a patient- and clinician-tailored web-based application and (2) testing the feasibility of the application to manage the needs of geriatric rehabilitation patients when leaving the hospital. In phase 1, we followed a user-centered design process integrated with the modern agile software development methodology to iteratively co-design the application. The approach consisted of three cycles in which we engaged patients, caregivers, and clinicians to design a series of prototypes (cycles 1-3). In phase 2, we conducted a single-arm feasibility pilot test of MyPath to Home. Baseline and follow-up surveys, as well as select semistructured interviews were conducted. Results In phase 1, semistructured interviews and talk-aloud sessions were conducted with patients/caregivers (n=5) and clinicians (n=17) to design the application. In phase 2, patients (n=30), caregivers (n=18), and clinicians (n=20) received access to use the application. Patients and their caregivers were asked to complete baseline and follow-up surveys. A total of 91% (21/23) of patients would recommend this application to other patients. In addition, clinicians (n=6) and patients/caregivers (n=6) were interviewed to obtain further details on the value of the web-based application with respect to engaging patients and facilitating communication and sharing of information with the health care team. Conclusions We were successful at designing the MyPath to Home prototype for patients and their caregivers to engage with their clinicians during the transition from geriatric rehabilitation to home. Further work is needed to increase the uptake and usage by clinicians, and determine if this translates to meaningful changes in clinical and functional outcomes. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/11031

BackgroundPrivacy concerns by providers have been a barrier to disclosing patient information for public health purposes. This is the case even for mandated notifiable disease reporting. In the context of a pandemic it has been argued that the public good should supersede an individual's right to privacy. The precise nature of these provider privacy concerns, and whether they are diluted in the context of a pandemic are not known. Our objective was to understand the privacy barriers which could potentially influence family physicians' reporting of patient-level surveillance data to public health agencies during the Fall 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza outbreak.MethodsThirty seven family doctors participated in a series of five focus groups between October 29-31 2009. They also completed a survey about the data they were willing to disclose to public health units. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the amount of patient detail the participants were willing to disclose, factors that would facilitate data disclosure, and the consensus on those factors. The analysis of the qualitative data was based on grounded theory.ResultsThe family doctors were reluctant to disclose patient data to public health units. This was due to concerns about the extent to which public health agencies are dependable to protect health information (trusting beliefs), and the possibility of loss due to disclosing health information (risk beliefs). We identified six specific actions that public health units can take which would affect these beliefs, and potentially increase the willingness to disclose patient information for public health purposes.ConclusionsThe uncertainty surrounding a pandemic of a new strain of influenza has not changed the privacy concerns of physicians about disclosing patient data. It is important to address these concerns to ensure reliable reporting during future outbreaks.

We conducted a prospective observational study to (1) determine usage and construct validity of a method to gauge the cognitive impact of information derived from daily e-mail, and (2) describe self-reported impacts of research-based synopses (InfoPOEMs) delivered as e-mail. Ratings of InfoPOEMs using an Impact assessment scale provided (a) data on usage of the impact assessment method, (b) reports of impact by InfoPOEM and by doctor and (c) data for analysis of construct validity of the scale. PARTICIPANTS were family physicians or general practitioners who rated at least five InfoPOEMs delivered on e-mail. For each InfoPOEM rated, 0.1 continuing education credit was awarded by the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Use of the impact assessment scale linked to a daily InfoPOEM was sustained during the 150-day study period. 1,007 participants submitted 61,493 reports of 'cognitive impact' by rating on average 61 InfoPOEMs (range 5-111). 'I learned something new' was most frequently reported. 'I was frustrated as there was not enough information or nothing useful' was the most frequently reported negative type of impact. The proportion of reports of 'No Impact' varied substantially across individual InfoPOEMs. Impact patterns suggested an 8 or 9-factor solution. Our Impact assessment method facilitates knowledge transfer by promoting two-way exchange between providers of health information and family doctors. Providers of health information can use this method to better understand the impact of research-based synopses. Sustaining current practice and increasing knowledge about new developments in medicine are important outcomes arising from research-based synopses delivered as e-mail, in addition to practice change.

BackgroundProviders have been reluctant to disclose patient data for public-health purposes. Even if patient privacy is ensured, the desire to protect provider confidentiality has been an important driver of this reluctance.MethodsSix requirements for a surveillance protocol were defined that satisfy the confidentiality needs of providers and ensure utility to public health. The authors developed a secure multi-party computation protocol using the Paillier cryptosystem to allow the disclosure of stratified case counts and denominators to meet these requirements. The authors evaluated the protocol in a simulated environment on its computation performance and ability to detect disease outbreak clusters.ResultsTheoretical and empirical assessments demonstrate that all requirements are met by the protocol. A system implementing the protocol scales linearly in terms of computation time as the number of providers is increased. The absolute time to perform the computations was 12.5 s for data from 3000 practices. This is acceptable performance, given that the reporting would normally be done at 24 h intervals. The accuracy of detection disease outbreak cluster was unchanged compared with a non-secure distributed surveillance protocol, with an F-score higher than 0.92 for outbreaks involving 500 or more cases.ConclusionThe protocol and associated software provide a practical method for providers to disclose patient data for sentinel, syndromic or other indicator-based surveillance while protecting patient privacy and the identity of individual providers.

Background Despite a substantial increase in the adoption of electronic medical records (EMRs) in primary health care settings, the use of advanced EMR features is limited. Several studies have identified both barriers and facilitating factors that influence primary care physicians’ (PCPs) use of advanced EMR features and the maturation of their EMR use. The purpose of this study is to explore and identify the factors that impact PCPs’ mature use of EMRs. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook. The MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO electronic databases were searched from 1946 to June 13, 2019. Two independent reviewers screened the studies for eligibility; to be included, studies had to address factors influencing PCPs’ mature use of EMRs. A narrative synthesis was conducted to collate study findings and to report on patterns identified across studies. The quality of the studies was also appraised. Results Of the 1893 studies identified, 14 were included in this study. Reported factors that influenced PCPs’ mature use of EMRs fell into one of the following 5 categories: technology, people, organization, resources, and policy. Concerns about the EMR system’s functionality, lack of physician awareness of EMR functionality, limited physician availability to learn more about EMRs, the habitual use of successfully completing clinical tasks using only basic EMR features, business-oriented organizational objectives, lack of vendor training, limited resource availability, and lack of physician readiness were reported as barriers to PCPs’ mature use of EMRs. The motivation of physicians, user satisfaction, coaching and peer mentoring, EMR experience, gender, physician perception, transition planning for changes in roles and work processes, team-based care, adequate technical support and training, sharing resources, practices affiliated with an integrated delivery system, financial incentives, and policies to increase EMR use all had a favorable impact on PCPs’ use of advanced EMR features. Conclusions By using a narrative synthesis to synthesize the evidence, we identified interrelated factors influencing the mature use of EMRs by PCPs. The findings underline the need to provide adequate training and policies that facilitate the mature use of EMRs by PCPs. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42019137526.

The content relevance of seven items was supported. For three items, revisions were needed. Interviews suggested one new item. This study has yielded a 2008 version of IAM.

Program delivery required partnering with 5 organizations. Participants valued Courriels Cochrane. IAM ratings documented their reflective learning. The aggregation of IAM ratings documented 3 levels of CME outcomes: participation, learning, and performance. This evaluation study demonstrates the feasibility of the Courriels Cochrane as an approach to further disseminate Cochrane systematic literature reviews to clinicians and document self-reported knowledge translation associated with Cochrane reviews.

PURPOSE Electronic consultation (eConsult) services can improve access to specialist advice. Little is known, however, about whether and how often primary care clinicians adhere to the advice they receive. We evaluated how primary care clinicians use recommendations conveyed by specialists via the Champlain BASE (Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation) eConsult service and how eConsult affects clinical management of patients in primary care. METHODS This is a descriptive analysis based on a retrospective chart audit of 291 eConsults done between January 20, 2017 and August 31, 2017 at the Bruyère Family Health Team, located in Ottawa, Canada. Patients' charts were reviewed until 6 months after specialist response for the following main outcomes: implementation of specialist advice by primary care clinicians, communication of the results to the patients, method, and time frame of communication. RESULTS Primary care clinicians adhered to specialist advice in 82% of cases. Adherence ranged from 62% to 93% across recommendation categories. Questions asked by primary care clinicians related to diagnosis (63%), management (27%), drug treatment (10%), and procedures (1%). Recommendations of the eConsult were communicated to patients in 79% of cases, most often by face-toface visit (38%), telephone call (32%), or use of the patient portal (9%). Communication occurred in a median of 5 days. CONCLUSIONS We found little evidence of barriers to implementing specialist advice with use of eConsult, which suggests recommendations given through service were actionable. With a high primary care clinician adherence to specialist recommendations and primary care clinician-to-patient communication, we conclude that eConsult delivers good-quality care and improves patient management.