Patient Experience and Attitudes Toward Electronic Intake and Patient-Reported Outcomes Within an Outpatient Whole Health Center.

Global advances in integrative medicine and health Pub Date : 2024-09-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/27536130241280181
Tracy L Segall, Samuel N Rodgers-Melnick, Jessica Surdam, Roshini Srinivasan, Jeffery A Dusek
{"title":"Patient Experience and Attitudes Toward Electronic Intake and Patient-Reported Outcomes Within an Outpatient Whole Health Center.","authors":"Tracy L Segall, Samuel N Rodgers-Melnick, Jessica Surdam, Roshini Srinivasan, Jeffery A Dusek","doi":"10.1177/27536130241280181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The use of electronic intake forms within the electronic health record (EHR) is an emerging method for routinely collecting patient-reported outcomes (PRO). However, few studies have evaluated experiences/perspectives toward electronic forms among outpatients receiving care within Integrative Health and Medicine (IHM) clinics. The study purpose was to understand patients' perspectives of electronic intake and PRO forms in the outpatient IHM setting. <b>Methods:</b> Electronic intake (e.g., treatment expectations, medical history, chief complaints, prior experience with integrative modalities) and PRO forms (i.e., Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-29, Perceived Stress Scale 4, Oswestry Disability Index) were designed in collaboration with clinic leadership and the Information Technology team. Semi-structured interviews were used to gather perspectives of the functionality and acceptability of the forms among outpatients receiving care at the IHM center. Interviews were coded to describe themes regarding perceptions and suggestions for improvement. <b>Results:</b> Qualitative interviews were completed with 10 participants (median age 51 years, 70% female, 30% Black/African American). Participants considered electronic intake and PRO forms as relevant to their health concerns, valuable for conveying important health information to providers, and easy to navigate. Suggested changes to the intake form included adding relevant open-ended questions, save and print functions, and examples and definitions to prompt responses. <b>Conclusion:</b> Participants felt the electronic format was a feasible and acceptable method of collecting patient information and PROs. Future goals are to implement the revised forms in a common EHR to patients receiving care at multiple IHM clinics across the United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":73159,"journal":{"name":"Global advances in integrative medicine and health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440562/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global advances in integrative medicine and health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27536130241280181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of electronic intake forms within the electronic health record (EHR) is an emerging method for routinely collecting patient-reported outcomes (PRO). However, few studies have evaluated experiences/perspectives toward electronic forms among outpatients receiving care within Integrative Health and Medicine (IHM) clinics. The study purpose was to understand patients' perspectives of electronic intake and PRO forms in the outpatient IHM setting. Methods: Electronic intake (e.g., treatment expectations, medical history, chief complaints, prior experience with integrative modalities) and PRO forms (i.e., Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-29, Perceived Stress Scale 4, Oswestry Disability Index) were designed in collaboration with clinic leadership and the Information Technology team. Semi-structured interviews were used to gather perspectives of the functionality and acceptability of the forms among outpatients receiving care at the IHM center. Interviews were coded to describe themes regarding perceptions and suggestions for improvement. Results: Qualitative interviews were completed with 10 participants (median age 51 years, 70% female, 30% Black/African American). Participants considered electronic intake and PRO forms as relevant to their health concerns, valuable for conveying important health information to providers, and easy to navigate. Suggested changes to the intake form included adding relevant open-ended questions, save and print functions, and examples and definitions to prompt responses. Conclusion: Participants felt the electronic format was a feasible and acceptable method of collecting patient information and PROs. Future goals are to implement the revised forms in a common EHR to patients receiving care at multiple IHM clinics across the United States.

在一家门诊整体健康中心内,患者对电子接诊和患者报告结果的体验和态度。
背景:在电子健康记录(EHR)中使用电子接收表单是常规收集患者报告结果(PRO)的一种新兴方法。然而,很少有研究对在中西医结合诊所(IHM)接受治疗的门诊患者使用电子表格的经验/观点进行评估。本研究旨在了解在中西医结合门诊接受治疗的患者对电子入院和PRO表格的看法。研究方法与诊所领导和信息技术团队合作设计了电子接诊表(例如,治疗期望、病史、主诉、之前使用综合疗法的经验)和PRO表(即,患者报告结果测量信息系统 [PROMIS]-29、感知压力量表4、Oswestry残疾指数)。通过半结构式访谈,收集了在 IHM 中心接受治疗的门诊患者对这些表格的功能性和可接受性的看法。对访谈内容进行编码,以描述有关看法和改进建议的主题。结果:对 10 名参与者(中位年龄 51 岁,70% 为女性,30% 为黑人/非裔美国人)进行了定性访谈。参与者认为电子入院和 PRO 表格与他们的健康问题相关,对于向医疗服务提供者传达重要的健康信息很有价值,而且易于浏览。建议对接收表进行的修改包括增加相关的开放式问题、保存和打印功能,以及提示回答的示例和定义。结论参与者认为电子格式是收集患者信息和 PROs 的可行且可接受的方法。未来的目标是将修订后的表格应用到通用的电子病历中,供全美多家 IHM 诊所的患者使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信