Patient Experience With Notification of Radiology Results: A Comparison of Direct Communication and Patient Portal Use

Garry, Kira; Blecker, Saul; Saag, Harry S.; Szerencsy, Adam; Jones, Simon; Testa, Paul; Kang, Stella K.

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2020.01.046

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Garry K, et al 2020 [9] Comparative study of patient satisfaction and understanding of radiology results when received through an electronic patient portal versus direct communication from providers.…”

Section: Yes Survey 129419 Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The current output of the system showed that radiology reports are not generally available through the web portal [38]. Information about radiology reports is generally limited when viewed through the portals [2,9,17,22,39,42,47]. The information currently provided is not easily understood by patients, which is an issue for many radiologists and referencing physicians (RPs).…”

Section: Current Radiological Reports and Patient Portalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Health communication objectives have varied benefits within the process of giving health care services. Some of the benefits of the scientific providing contribution towards developing a shared decision making process between the providers and patients include the following [9,18,21,28,31]. The objective contributes to improving the quality of health care as well as health care safety.…”

Section: Impacts Of the Health Communications Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Full Radiology Report through Patient Web Portal: A Literature Review

Alarifi

Patrick

Jabour³

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study discusses the gap between the patient web portal and providing a full radiology report. A literature review was conducted to examine radiologists, physicians, and patients’ opinions and preferences of providing patients with online access radiology reports. The databases searched were Pubmed and Google Scholar and the initial search included 927 studies. After review, 47 studies were included in the study. We identified several themes, including patients’ understanding of radiology reports and radiological images, as well as the need for decreasing the turnaround time for reports availability. The existing radiology reports written for physicians are not suited for patients. Further studies are needed to guide and inform the design of patient friendly radiology reports. One of the ways that can be used to fill the gap between patients and radiology reports is using social media sites.

show abstract

Section: Yes Survey 129419 Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current Radiological Reports and Patient Portalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Impacts Of the Health Communications Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Full Radiology Report through Patient Web Portal: A Literature Review

Alarifi

Patrick

Jabour³

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most commonly used portal function was the access to laboratory or diagnostic test results. The studies assessing this function concluded that the impact was multifaceted, providing patients with convenience, knowledge, tracking of information, decreased anxiety, and the need for fewer appointments [58,61,68,73,77,83,97,103,106,113]. Visual indications were used to determine whether the test results were normal or abnormal (ie, green or red color).…”

Section: Access To Test Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The problem of not understanding results led to apprehension and anxiety until the patient was able to connect with their provider and obtain clarification [73,77]. A study found that one of every 6 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging or computerized tomography scans reported a clear understanding of their results when first receiving them through the portal [83]. Patients wanted to receive all their results, even the abnormal ones, but they needed more timely notifications and guidance by their provider in interpreting them [90].…”

Section: Access To Test Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing the Impact of Patient Portals Based on the Quadruple Aim and Benefits Evaluation Frameworks: Scoping Review (Preprint)

Avdagovska¹,

Menon²,

Stafinski³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Electronic patient portals are secure websites tied to an institutional electronic health record system from which patients can view their medical information. These types of records are populated with a person’s lifetime health history. Despite the continuing extensive research in this area, measuring patient portal impact continues to be a convoluted process. OBJECTIVE To explore what is known about patient portal evaluations and provide recommendations for future endeavours. The focus was on mapping what measures are used to assess the impact of patient portals on the four specific dimensions (patient, population, healthcare workforce, and health system perspectives) of the Quadruple Aim Framework, and what components from the Benefits Evaluation Framework were most commonly evaluated to measure impact. METHODS A scoping review was conducted using the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley. Reporting was guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. A systematic and comprehensive search using the OVID platform, the following databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, and PsycINFO. CINAHL on the Ebsco platform and Web of Science were also searched for studies published between 2015 and June 2020. A systematic grey literature search was conducted using the Google search engine in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada between February 13 and February 25, 2020. A data extraction form was developed and reviewed to categorize the literature into themes and areas of interest, which varied by study type. Two frameworks for analysis were incorporated, the Quadruple Aim and the Canada Health Infoway’s Benefits Evaluation Frameworks. Extracted data were tabulated based on a coding template developed to categorize the literature into themes and areas of interest, which varied by study type and QA perspective. Furthermore, the evaluated patient portal functions were mapped onto the Benefits Evaluation Framework. A descriptive, analytical approach was used to summarize the outcomes of the studies. In addition, a list of the various terms/outcomes/variables that were used to describe ‘impact’ was compiled. RESULTS In total, 96 studies were included for data extraction. The studies were categorized based on the Quadruple Aim dimensions, with strict adherence to the definitions for each dimension(1,2). From the patient perspective, we identified that most evaluations focused on benefits and barriers to access, access to test results, medication adherence, condition management, medical notes, and secure messaging. From the population perspective, the evaluations focused on increase in population outreach, decrease in disparities related to access of care services, and improvement in quality of care. From the healthcare workforce perspective, the evaluations focused on impact of patients accessing medical records, impact on workflow, impact of bi-directional secure messaging, and virtual care. From the health system perspective, the evaluations focused on decrease in no-show appointments, impact on office visits and telephone calls, impact on admission and readmission rates and emergency department visits, and impact on healthcare utilization. Altogether, 77 peer-reviewed studies were mapped on the expanded version of the BE Framework. The mapping was done by sub-dimension to create a more precise representation about the areas that are currently explored when studying patient portals. Most of the studies evaluated more than one sub-dimension. CONCLUSIONS Despite the extensive and existing research in the area of patient portals, the evidence from this scoping review suggests that impact research is available, but it lacks multidimensionality. The Quadruple Aim and the Benefits Evaluation Frameworks provided guidance in identifying the gaps in the current literature by providing a way to show how impact was assessed. This review highlights the need to appropriately plan how impact will be assessed and how the findings will be translated into effective adaptations. If the how and what are not properly planned, the generalizability of patient portals studies will continue to elude researchers and implementation teams.

show abstract