2012 EDUCATIONAL BOOK - American Society of Clinical Oncology

PERSONAL HEALTH RECORDS
study participants. One key problem in smaller practices is
that both patients and clinicians may be unaware of ongoing
studies in a particular disease; technology can effectively
match up clinicians, patients, and protocols. The PHR is also
an efficient way to securely gather information from patients
on protocols, such as symptoms, quality-of life scores, and
other research information. These uses have to be implemented
in an ethical way that meets health services research
guidelines but can be a powerful tool when done well.
Evaluating the Intervention
Most PHRs include some logging function to record what a
user did and saw while using the system. These data are rich
for mining to determine what patients are doing with the
system, what functions are used most frequently, and what
aspects are never used. Regular reporting and analysis of
usage patterns are crucial, as is periodic re-engagement
with stakeholders to address shifting needs and technologies.
For example, in 2006, few designers thought about the
need to access patient portals from cell phones other than
Authors’ Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest
Author
Henry Feldman*
Elizabeth S. Rodriguez*
*No relevant relationships to disclose.
Employment or
Leadership
Positions
Consultant or
Advisory Role
1. Sands DZ, Halamka JD, Pellaton D. PatientSite: a Web-based clinical
communication and health education tool. HIMSS Proc. 2001;3:1-6.
2. Tarn DM, Flocke A. New prescriptions: how well do patients remember
important information? Fam Med. 2011;43:254-259.
3. Nightingale SL. Do physicians tell patients enough about prescription
drugs? Do patients think so? Postgrad Med. 1983;74:169-175.
4. Siteman E, Businger A, Gandhi T, et al. Patient review of selected
electronic health record data improves visit experience. AMIA Annu Symp
Proc. 2006:1101.
5. Siteman E, Businger A, Gandhi T, et al. Clinicians recognize value of
patient review of their electronic health record data, AMIA Annu Symp Proc.
2006:1101.
6. Reti SR, Feldman HJ, Ross SE, et al. Governance for personal health
records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16:14-17.
7. Halamka J, Aranow M, Ascenzo C, et al. Health care IT collaboration in
Massachusetts: the experience of creating regional connectivity. JAmMed
Inform Assoc. 2005;12:596-601.
through text messaging, but after the introduction of the
iPhone and other smartphones, this access became an important
area for PHR designers to consider, as patients have
became much more sophisticated in their demands for mobile
interaction.
Conclusion
PHRs are coming to practices around the United States,
and oncology practices large and small will have to adopt
these technologies. Practices will confront many of the
issues described in this chapter, and will need careful
governance, stakeholder engagement, and constant reassessment.
PHRs serve many masters across many domains
and needs. Patients are already demanding access to their
records, and government regulations are requiring these in
upcoming years. Thus, instead of thinking of PHRs as a
burden, oncologists should view them as an opportunity to
promote their practice, engage and educate their patients,
and, possibly, in the ACO era, lower the utilization in their
practice.
Stock
Ownership Honoraria
REFERENCES
Research
Funding
Expert
Testimony
Other
Remuneration
8. Earnest MA, Ross SE, Wittevrongel L, et al Use of a patient-accessible
electronic medical record in a practice for congestive heart failure: patient and
physician experiences. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11:410-417.
9. Rodriguez ES. Using a patient portal for electronic communication with
oncology patients: implications for nurses. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2010;37:667-
671.
10. Walker J, et al. Inviting patients to read their doctors’ notes: patients
and doctors look ahead - patient and physician surveys. Ann Intern Med.
2011;155:811-819, 2011.
11. Delbanco T, Walker J, Darer JD, et al. Open notes: doctors and patients
signing on. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153:121-125.
12. Wald JS, Burk K, Gardner K, et al. Sharing electronic laboratory
results in a patient portal-a feasibility pilot. Stud Health Technol Inform.
2007;129(Pt 1):18-22.
13. Rodriguez ES, Thom B, Schneider SM. Nurse and physician perspectives
of cancer patients having online access to their lab results. Oncol Nurs
Forum. 2011;38:476-482.
e69