Tiffany Brown

Disparities in Enrollment and Use of an Electronic Patient Portal

BackgroundWith emphasis on the meaningful use of electronic health records, patient portals are likely to become increasingly important. Little is known about patient enrollment in, and use of, patient portals after explicit invitation from providers.ObjectivesTo examine enrollment in, and use of, an electronic patient portal by race/ethnicity, gender and age.DesignObservational, cross sectional study.ParticipantsPatients with attending physicians seen at one urban, academic primary care practice between May 2008 and October 2009 who received electronic orders inviting their participation in an electronic patient portal.Main Measures(a) Enrollment in the patient portal, (b) Solicitation of provider advice among enrollees, (c) Requests for medication refills among enrollees.Key ResultsOverall, 69% of 7,088 patients enrolled in the patient portal. All minority patients were significantly less likely to enroll than whites: 55% blacks, 64% Latinos and 66% Asians compared with 74% whites (chi-square p < 0.05 for all pairwise comparisons). These disparities persisted in adjusted analyses, although differences for Asians were no longer significant. In addition, the oldest patients were less likely to enroll than the youngest (adjusted OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65–0.97). Although there were no racial/ethnic disparities in use of the patient portal among enrollees, we found differences by age and gender. The youngest patients were significantly less likely to solicit provider advice or request medication refills than any other age group in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Similarly, male patients were less likely to solicit provider advice than women in all analyses.ConclusionLarge racial/ethnic disparities were seen in enrollment in our patient portal. Among enrollees, use of the portal was similar by race/ethnicity, but not by age or gender. Future efforts to expand use of the patient portal need to address potential mechanisms for these disparities to ensure this technology is accessible to diverse patient populations.

Comparative Effectiveness of a Multifaceted Intervention to Improve Adherence to Annual Colorectal Cancer Screening in Community Health Centers: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are lower among Latinos and people living in poverty. Fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is one recommended screening modality that may overcome cost and access barriers. However, the ability of FOBT to reduce CRC mortality depends on high rates of adherence to annual screening. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a multifaceted intervention increases adherence to annual FOBT compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patient-level randomized controlled trial conducted in a network of community health centers. Included were 450 patients who had previously completed a home FOBT from March 2011 through February 2012 and had a negative test result: 72% of participants were women; 87% were Latino; 83% stated that Spanish was their preferred language; and 77% were uninsured. INTERVENTIONS Usual care at participating health centers included computerized reminders, standing orders for medical assistants to give patients home fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), and clinician feedback on CRC screening rates. The intervention group also received (1) a mailed reminder letter, a free FIT with low-literacy instructions, and a postage-paid return envelope; (2) an automated telephone and text message reminding them that they were due for screening and that a FIT was being mailed to them; (3) an automated telephone and text reminder 2 weeks later for those who did not return the FIT; and (4) personal telephone outreach by a CRC screening navigator after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Completion of FOBT within 6 months of the date the patient was due for annual screening. RESULTS Intervention patients were much more likely than those in usual care to complete FOBT (82.2% vs 37.3%; P < .001). Of the 185 intervention patients completing screening, 10.2% completed prior to their due date (intervention was not given), 39.6% within 2 weeks (after initial intervention), 24.0% within 2 to 13 weeks (after automated call/text reminder), and 8.4% between 13 and 26 weeks (after personal call). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This intervention greatly increased adherence to annual CRC screening; most screenings were achieved without personal calls. It is possible to improve annual CRC screening for vulnerable populations with relatively low-cost strategies that are facilitated by health information technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01453894.

Patient Outreach to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Patients With an Expired Order for Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND Targeted interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among specific populations could increase screening rates. Patients with an expired order for screening colonoscopy might be persuaded to follow through with screening by such an intervention. METHODS We conducted a randomized controlled trial of a combined reminder/outreach intervention among patients in a large general internal medicine practice. Participants included 628 patients aged 50 to 79 years with an expired order for screening colonoscopy. Patients were stratified based on receipt of any previous colorectal cancer screening and randomly assigned either to (1) an intervention group that received a mailing containing a reminder letter from their primary care physician, a brochure and digital video disc about colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer screening, and a follow-up telephone call or (2) a usual care control group. The primary outcome was receipt of fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy within 3 months of randomization. Screening outcomes were observed for an additional 3 months (6 months from randomization). RESULTS Screening rates at 3 months were 9.9% (31 of 314 patients) in the intervention group and 3.2% (10 of 314 patients) in the control group (rate ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-6.2; P = .001). At 6 months, rates were 18.2% (57 of 314 patients) and 12.1% (38 of 314 patients), respectively (rate ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.2; P = .03). CONCLUSION Patient outreach to individuals with an expired order for colonoscopy may be an effective tool to modestly increase short-term completion of colorectal cancer screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00793455.

Individualized Risk Communication and Outreach for Primary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Community Health Centers: Randomized Trial

Background—Many eligible primary cardiovascular disease prevention candidates are not treated with statins. Electronic health record data can identify patients with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Methods and Results—We performed a pragmatic randomized controlled trial at community health centers in 2 states. Participants were men aged ≥35 years and women ≥45 years, without cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus, and with a 10-year risk of coronary heart disease of at least 10%. The intervention group received telephone and mailed outreach, individualized based on patients’ cardiovascular disease risk and uncontrolled risk factors, provided by lay health workers. Main outcomes included: documented discussion of medication treatment for cholesterol with a primary care clinician, receipt of statin prescription within 6 months, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol repeated and at least 30 mg/dL lower than baseline within 1 year. Six hundred forty-six participants (328 and 318 in the intervention and control groups, respectively) were included. At 6 months, 26.8% of intervention and 11.6% of control patients had discussed cholesterol treatment with a primary care clinician (odds ratio, 2.79; [95% confidence interval, 2.25–3.46]). Statin prescribing occurred for 10.1% in the intervention group and 6.0% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.76; [95% confidence interval, 0.90–3.45]). The cholesterol outcome did not differ, and the majority of patients did not repeat lipid levels during follow-up. Conclusions—Risk communication and lay outreach increased cholesterol treatment discussions with primary care clinicians. However, most discussions did not result in statin prescribing. For outreach to be successful, it should be combined with interventions to encourage clinicians to follow contemporary risk-based cholesterol treatment guidelines. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clincialtrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01610609.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates at Community Health Centers that Use Electronic Health Records: A Cross Sectional Study

Background. This study was conducted to validate use of electronic health record (EHR) data for measuring colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates at community health centers (CHCs). Methods. Electronic health records were queried to assess screening via colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in 2011. Results. Multiple iterations were required to maximize query accuracy. Manual chart reviews, stratified by screening modality, confirmed query results for 112 of 113 (99.1%) reviewed colonoscopies, 110 of 110 (100%) reviewed FOBTs, and 111 of 120 (92.5%) unscreened patients. At participating CHCs, CRC screening rates ranged from 9.7% to 67.2% (median, 30.6%). Adherence to annual FOBT ranged from 3.3% to 59.0% (median, 18.6%). Most screening was done by colonoscopy. Conclusions. Colorectal cancer screening varies substantially across CHCs. Electronic health record data can validly measure CRC screening, but repeated assessments of programming accuracy are required. Community health centers may need support to measure quality using EHR data and increase screening.

A Multifaceted Intervention to Improve Influenza, Pneumococcal, and Herpes Zoster Vaccination among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective. Vaccination rates for influenza, pneumococcus, and zoster in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have remained low. Simple electronic or paper reminders have produced only small increases in vaccination rates. We sought to identify a more effective approach to improve vaccination rates. Methods. We conducted a system-level intervention at an academic rheumatology clinic that included electronic reminders with linked order sets, physician auditing and feedback, patient outreach, and optional printed prescriptions for zoster vaccination at an outside pharmacy. Results. We targeted 1255 eligible patients with RA. There was no change in patients’ self-reported influenza vaccination rates, although the baseline self-reported rate was already high and much higher than that documented in the electronic health record. Pneumococcal vaccination rates increased from 28.7% to 45.8%; in regression analysis, the rate of change in pneumococcal vaccination increased by 9.4% per year above baseline trends (95% CI 3.9–15.5, p = 0.002). The rate of zoster vaccination increased from 2.5% to 4.5% overall (p = 0.01) and from 3.0% to 6.6% among patients not receiving biologic therapy that precluded zoster vaccination. Conclusion. Although the intervention improved pneumococcal and zoster vaccination rates, the improvement in pneumococcal vaccination rate was less than expected, and the zoster vaccination rate remained low even for ideal candidates. Likely barriers include lack of familiarity and difficulty using electronic reminders and order sets, uncertainty about the value and safety of recommended vaccines, and uncertainty about patients’ insurance coverage and prior vaccination history. Future interventions should include strategies to address these.

Predictors of cholesterol treatment discussions and statin prescribing for primary cardiovascular disease prevention in community health centers.

BACKGROUND Although cholesterol guidelines emphasize cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk to guide primary prevention, predictors of statin use in practice are unknown. We aimed to identify factors associated with a cholesterol treatment discussion and statin prescribing in a high-risk population. METHODS We used data from a trial conducted among participants in community health centers without CVD or diabetes and a 10-year coronary heart disease (CHD) risk≥10%. Cholesterol treatment discussion was assessed at 6months and statin prescription at 1year. We used logistic regressions to identify factors associated with each outcome. RESULTS We analyzed 646 participants (89% male, mean age 60±9.5years). Cholesterol treatment discussion occurred in 19% and statin prescription in 12% of participants. Ten-year CHD risk was not associated with treatment discussion (OR 1.11 per 1 SD increase, 95% CI 0.91-1.33) but was associated with statin prescription (OR 1.41 per 1 SD increase, 95% CI 1.13-1.75) in unadjusted models. After adjusting for traditional CVD risk factors that contribute to CHD risk, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was independently associated with statin prescription (OR 1.82 per 1 SD increase, 95% CI 1.66-1.99). Antihypertensive medication use was independently associated with both cholesterol treatment discussion (OR 3.68, 95% CI 2.35-5.75) and statin prescription (OR 3.98, 95% CI 3.30-4.81). Other drivers of CVD risk (age, smoking, and systolic blood pressure) were not associated with statin use. CONCLUSIONS Single risk factor management strongly influences cholesterol treatment discussions and statin prescribing patterns. Interventions that promote risk-based statin utilization are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov.: NCT01610609.

Point-of-care testing to promote cardiovascular disease risk assessment: A proof of concept study

Updated cholesterol guidelines emphasize multivariable cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation to guide treatment decision-making in primary prevention. This study tested the preliminary feasibility, acceptability and efficacy of point-of-care testing (POCT) and quantitative CVD risk assessment in high-risk adults to increase guideline-recommended statin use in primary prevention. Participants were aged 40–75 years, without CVD or diabetes mellitus, and potentially-eligible for consideration of statins based on estimated 10-year CVD risk from last-measured risk factor levels in the electronic health record. We performed POCT to facilitate quantitative CVD risk assessment with the Pooled Cohort Equations immediately before a scheduled primary care provider (PCP) visit. Outcomes were: physician documentation of a CVD risk discussion and statin prescription on the study date. We also assessed acceptability of the intervention through structured questionnaire. We recruited 18 participants (8 from an academic practice and 10 from a federally-qualified health clinic). After the intervention, 83% of participants discussed CVD risk with their PCP, 47% received a statin recommendation from their PCP, and 29% received a new statin prescription during the PCP visit. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the intervention. This study demonstrates that in initial testing pre-visit POCT and quantitative CVD risk assessment appears to be a feasible and acceptable intervention that may promote guideline-recommended statin initiation in primary prevention. Future research with an adequately powered trial is warranted to determine the effectiveness of this approach in clinical practice.

“The Doctor Needs to Know”: Acceptability of Smartphone Location Tracking for Care Coordination

Background Care coordination can be highly challenging to carry out. When care is fragmented across health systems and providers, there is an increased likelihood of hospital readmissions and wasteful health care spending. During and after care transitions, smartphones have the potential to bolster information transfer and care coordination. However, little research has examined patients’ perceptions of using smartphones to coordinate care. Objective This study’s primary objective was to explore patient acceptability of a smartphone app that could facilitate care coordination in a safety net setting. Our secondary objective was to identify how clinicians and other members of primary care teams could use this app to coordinate care. Methods This qualitative study was conducted at a federally qualified health center in metropolitan Chicago, IL. We conducted four focus groups (two in English, two in Spanish) with high-risk adults who owned a smartphone and received services from an organizational care management program. We also conducted structured interviews with clinicians and a group interview with care managers. Focus groups elicited patients’ perceptions of a smartphone app designed to: (1) identify emergency department (ED) visits and inpatient stays using real-time location data; (2) send automated notifications (ie, alerts) to users’ phones, asking whether they were a patient in the hospital; and (3) send automated messages to primary care teams to notify them about patients’ confirmed ED visits and inpatient stays. Focus group transcripts were coded based on emergent themes. Clinicians and care managers were asked about messages they would like to receive from the app. Results Five main themes emerged in patient focus group discussions. First, participants expressed a high degree of willingness to use the proposed app during inpatient stays. Second, participants expressed varying degrees of willingness to use the app during ED visits, particularly for low acuity ED visits. Third, participants stated their willingness to have their location tracked by the proposed app due to its perceived benefits. Fourth, the most frequently mentioned barriers to acceptability were inconveniences such as “false alarm” notifications and smartphone battery drainage. Finally, there was some tension between how to maximize usability without unnecessarily increasing user burden. Both clinicians and care managers expressed interest in receiving messages from the app at the time of hospital arrival and at discharge. Clinicians were particularly interested in conducting outreach during ED visits and inpatient stays, while care managers expressed more interest in coordinating postdischarge care. Conclusions High-risk primary care patients in a safety net setting reported a willingness to utilize smartphone location tracking technology to facilitate care coordination. Further research is needed on the development and implementation of new smartphone-based approaches to care coordination.

Effect of Electronic Health Record–Based Medication Support and Nurse-Led Medication Therapy Management on Hypertension and Medication Self-management: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Complex medication regimens pose self-management challenges, particularly among populations with low levels of health literacy. Objective To test medication management tools delivered through a commercial electronic health record (EHR) with and without a nurse-led education intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants This 3-group cluster randomized clinical trial was performed in community health centers in Chicago, Illinois. Participants included 794 patients with hypertension who self-reported using 3 or more medications concurrently (for any purpose). Data were collected from April 30, 2012, through February 29, 2016, and analyzed by intention to treat. Interventions Clinics were randomly assigned to to groups: electronic health record–based medication management tools (medication review sheets at visit check-in, lay medication information sheets printed after visits; EHR-alone group), EHR-based tools plus nurse-led medication management support (EHR plus education group), or usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes at 12 months included systolic blood pressure (primary outcome), medication reconciliation, knowledge of drug indications, understanding of medication instructions and dosing, and self-reported medication adherence. Medication outcomes were assessed for all hypertension prescriptions, all prescriptions to treat chronic disease, and all medications. Results Among the 794 participants (68.6% women; mean [SD] age, 52.7 [9.6] years), systolic blood pressure at 12 months was greater in the EHR-alone group compared with the usual care group by 3.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.3 to 6.9 mm Hg). Systolic blood pressure in the EHR plus education group was not significantly lower compared with the usual care group (difference, −2.0 mm Hg; 95% CI, −5.2 to 1.3 mm Hg) but was lower compared with the EHR-alone group (−5.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, −8.8 to −2.4 mm Hg). At 12 months, hypertension medication reconciliation was improved in the EHR-alone group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9) and the EHR plus education group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.3) compared with usual care. Understanding of medication instructions and dosing was greater in the EHR plus education group than the usual care group for hypertension medications (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.8) and all medications combined (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.8). Compared with usual care, the EHR tools alone and EHR plus education interventions did not improve hypertension medication adherence (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6-1.4 for both) or knowledge of chronic drug indications (OR for EHR tools alone, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5] and OR for EHR plus education, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.7-1.7]). Conclusions and Relevance The study found that EHR tools in isolation improved medication reconciliation but worsened blood pressure. Combining these tools with nurse-led support suggested improved understanding of medication instructions and dosing but did not lower blood pressure compared with usual care. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01578577