Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions
Abstract Objectives We sought to understand the objectives, targeted populations, therapeutic elements, and delivery characteristics of patient portal interventions. Materials and Methods Following Arksey and O-Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | JAMIA open 2023-10, Vol.6 (3), p.ooad077-ooad077 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | ooad077 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | ooad077 |
container_title | JAMIA open |
container_volume | 6 |
creator | Gleason, Kelly T Powell, Danielle S Wec, Aleksandra Zou, Xingyuan Gamper, Mary Jo Peereboom, Danielle Wolff, Jennifer L |
description | Abstract
Objectives
We sought to understand the objectives, targeted populations, therapeutic elements, and delivery characteristics of patient portal interventions.
Materials and Methods
Following Arksey and O-Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published through June 2022 by hand and systematically searching PubMed, PSYCHInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. The search yielded 5403 manuscripts; 248 were selected for full-text review; 81 met the eligibility criteria for examining outcomes of a patient portal intervention.
Results
The 81 articles described: trials involving comparison groups (n = 37; 45.7%), quality improvement initiatives (n = 15; 18.5%), pilot studies (n = 7; 8.6%), and single-arm studies (n = 22; 27.2%). Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 33, 40.7%), specialty outpatient (n = 24, 29.6%), or inpatient settings (n = 4, 4.9%)—or they were deployed system wide (n = 9, 11.1%). Interventions targeted specific health conditions (n = 35, 43.2%), promoted preventive services (n = 19, 23.5%), or addressed communication (n = 19, 23.4%); few specifically sought to improve the patient experience (n = 3, 3.7%). About half of the studies (n = 40, 49.4%) relied on human involvement, and about half involved personalized (vs exclusively standardized) elements (n = 42, 51.8%). Interventions commonly collected patient-reported information (n = 36, 44.4%), provided education (n = 35, 43.2%), or deployed preventive service reminders (n = 14, 17.3%).
Discussion
This scoping review finds that most patient portal interventions have delivered education or facilitated collection of patient-reported information. Few interventions have involved pragmatic designs or been deployed system wide.
Conclusion
The patient portal is an important tool in real-world efforts to more effectively support patients, but interventions to date rely largely on evidence from consented participants rather than pragmatically implemented systems-level initiatives.
Lay Summary
The patient portal is often used by patients and their care partners to manage their healthcare. Some clinical care sites have deployed and evaluated portal-based interventions to better support patients and care partners in their healthcare. However, we know little about how portal-based interventions are delivered, what activities or tools are included to support the patient, and what conditions (eg, diabetes or high blood pressure) have been targeted. Given this, w |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10469545</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A776239019</galeid><oup_id>10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A776239019</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-2d024570154cfa0dda919347cf4dd4f7e01830e597876d55637358130c61140d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks9qHSEUxofSQkOaB-hO6KaL3ERHHcduSgj9B4F2kazlVM_cGGZ0qs4teYU8dRzuJTRQSnGhfOf3feeAp2neMnrGqObndzB5iDOG8xjBUaVeNEetVGLTSs5e_vF-3ZzkfEcpZVrrjtOj5uEHFI-hkDmmAiPxoWDaVcHHkD8QINnG2YctSbjz-JvEgQxLsGsZRl_uTwksJU6wCmTJ6KoQHCm3mGDGpXhLcMSpBubVO_-j25vm1QBjxpPDfdzcfP50ffl1c_X9y7fLi6uNFT0rm9bRVkhFmRR2AOocaKa5UHYQzolBIWU9pyi16lXnpOy44rJnnNqOMUEdP24-7nPn5eeEztb2CUYzJz9BujcRvHleCf7WbOPOMCo6LYWsCe8PCSn-WjAXM_lscRwhYFyyafuOdkzJVlf03R7dwojGhyHWSLvi5kKpruW6_kWlzv5C1eNw8jYGHHzVnxnY3mBTzDnh8DQ-o2bdCfO0E-awE9VzuvfEZf4P_BEWhMAG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2860617529</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Gleason, Kelly T ; Powell, Danielle S ; Wec, Aleksandra ; Zou, Xingyuan ; Gamper, Mary Jo ; Peereboom, Danielle ; Wolff, Jennifer L</creator><creatorcontrib>Gleason, Kelly T ; Powell, Danielle S ; Wec, Aleksandra ; Zou, Xingyuan ; Gamper, Mary Jo ; Peereboom, Danielle ; Wolff, Jennifer L</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
Objectives
We sought to understand the objectives, targeted populations, therapeutic elements, and delivery characteristics of patient portal interventions.
Materials and Methods
Following Arksey and O-Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published through June 2022 by hand and systematically searching PubMed, PSYCHInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. The search yielded 5403 manuscripts; 248 were selected for full-text review; 81 met the eligibility criteria for examining outcomes of a patient portal intervention.
Results
The 81 articles described: trials involving comparison groups (n = 37; 45.7%), quality improvement initiatives (n = 15; 18.5%), pilot studies (n = 7; 8.6%), and single-arm studies (n = 22; 27.2%). Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 33, 40.7%), specialty outpatient (n = 24, 29.6%), or inpatient settings (n = 4, 4.9%)—or they were deployed system wide (n = 9, 11.1%). Interventions targeted specific health conditions (n = 35, 43.2%), promoted preventive services (n = 19, 23.5%), or addressed communication (n = 19, 23.4%); few specifically sought to improve the patient experience (n = 3, 3.7%). About half of the studies (n = 40, 49.4%) relied on human involvement, and about half involved personalized (vs exclusively standardized) elements (n = 42, 51.8%). Interventions commonly collected patient-reported information (n = 36, 44.4%), provided education (n = 35, 43.2%), or deployed preventive service reminders (n = 14, 17.3%).
Discussion
This scoping review finds that most patient portal interventions have delivered education or facilitated collection of patient-reported information. Few interventions have involved pragmatic designs or been deployed system wide.
Conclusion
The patient portal is an important tool in real-world efforts to more effectively support patients, but interventions to date rely largely on evidence from consented participants rather than pragmatically implemented systems-level initiatives.
Lay Summary
The patient portal is often used by patients and their care partners to manage their healthcare. Some clinical care sites have deployed and evaluated portal-based interventions to better support patients and care partners in their healthcare. However, we know little about how portal-based interventions are delivered, what activities or tools are included to support the patient, and what conditions (eg, diabetes or high blood pressure) have been targeted. Given this, we conducted a search of the literature to understand what is known about patient portal interventions, which we describe in this article. We found that most studied interventions were conducted in primary care or specialty outpatient care; few interventions were conducted in a hospital setting. The majority of published interventions were conducted as part of a trial, rather than as a quality improvement initiative. Interventions primarily targeted specific health conditions (43.2%), promoted preventive services (23.5%), or addressed communication (23.4%). Interventions commonly collected information directly from patients, provided education, or deployed preventive service reminders. Based on these findings, we conclude that there is limited evidence regarding portal-based interventions implemented in a real-world setting, and that most have targeted education and/or preventive services.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2574-2531</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2574-2531</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Computational linguistics ; Health aspects ; Hypertension ; Language processing ; Medicine, Preventive ; Natural language interfaces ; Preventive health services ; Quality control ; Review</subject><ispartof>JAMIA open, 2023-10, Vol.6 (3), p.ooad077-ooad077</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2023</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Oxford University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-2d024570154cfa0dda919347cf4dd4f7e01830e597876d55637358130c61140d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-2d024570154cfa0dda919347cf4dd4f7e01830e597876d55637358130c61140d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4203-6517 ; 0000-0003-3447-4450</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10469545/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10469545/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,1603,27915,27916,53782,53784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gleason, Kelly T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Powell, Danielle S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wec, Aleksandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Xingyuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gamper, Mary Jo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peereboom, Danielle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolff, Jennifer L</creatorcontrib><title>Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions</title><title>JAMIA open</title><description>Abstract
Objectives
We sought to understand the objectives, targeted populations, therapeutic elements, and delivery characteristics of patient portal interventions.
Materials and Methods
Following Arksey and O-Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published through June 2022 by hand and systematically searching PubMed, PSYCHInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. The search yielded 5403 manuscripts; 248 were selected for full-text review; 81 met the eligibility criteria for examining outcomes of a patient portal intervention.
Results
The 81 articles described: trials involving comparison groups (n = 37; 45.7%), quality improvement initiatives (n = 15; 18.5%), pilot studies (n = 7; 8.6%), and single-arm studies (n = 22; 27.2%). Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 33, 40.7%), specialty outpatient (n = 24, 29.6%), or inpatient settings (n = 4, 4.9%)—or they were deployed system wide (n = 9, 11.1%). Interventions targeted specific health conditions (n = 35, 43.2%), promoted preventive services (n = 19, 23.5%), or addressed communication (n = 19, 23.4%); few specifically sought to improve the patient experience (n = 3, 3.7%). About half of the studies (n = 40, 49.4%) relied on human involvement, and about half involved personalized (vs exclusively standardized) elements (n = 42, 51.8%). Interventions commonly collected patient-reported information (n = 36, 44.4%), provided education (n = 35, 43.2%), or deployed preventive service reminders (n = 14, 17.3%).
Discussion
This scoping review finds that most patient portal interventions have delivered education or facilitated collection of patient-reported information. Few interventions have involved pragmatic designs or been deployed system wide.
Conclusion
The patient portal is an important tool in real-world efforts to more effectively support patients, but interventions to date rely largely on evidence from consented participants rather than pragmatically implemented systems-level initiatives.
Lay Summary
The patient portal is often used by patients and their care partners to manage their healthcare. Some clinical care sites have deployed and evaluated portal-based interventions to better support patients and care partners in their healthcare. However, we know little about how portal-based interventions are delivered, what activities or tools are included to support the patient, and what conditions (eg, diabetes or high blood pressure) have been targeted. Given this, we conducted a search of the literature to understand what is known about patient portal interventions, which we describe in this article. We found that most studied interventions were conducted in primary care or specialty outpatient care; few interventions were conducted in a hospital setting. The majority of published interventions were conducted as part of a trial, rather than as a quality improvement initiative. Interventions primarily targeted specific health conditions (43.2%), promoted preventive services (23.5%), or addressed communication (23.4%). Interventions commonly collected information directly from patients, provided education, or deployed preventive service reminders. Based on these findings, we conclude that there is limited evidence regarding portal-based interventions implemented in a real-world setting, and that most have targeted education and/or preventive services.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Computational linguistics</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Language processing</subject><subject>Medicine, Preventive</subject><subject>Natural language interfaces</subject><subject>Preventive health services</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Review</subject><issn>2574-2531</issn><issn>2574-2531</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks9qHSEUxofSQkOaB-hO6KaL3ERHHcduSgj9B4F2kazlVM_cGGZ0qs4teYU8dRzuJTRQSnGhfOf3feeAp2neMnrGqObndzB5iDOG8xjBUaVeNEetVGLTSs5e_vF-3ZzkfEcpZVrrjtOj5uEHFI-hkDmmAiPxoWDaVcHHkD8QINnG2YctSbjz-JvEgQxLsGsZRl_uTwksJU6wCmTJ6KoQHCm3mGDGpXhLcMSpBubVO_-j25vm1QBjxpPDfdzcfP50ffl1c_X9y7fLi6uNFT0rm9bRVkhFmRR2AOocaKa5UHYQzolBIWU9pyi16lXnpOy44rJnnNqOMUEdP24-7nPn5eeEztb2CUYzJz9BujcRvHleCf7WbOPOMCo6LYWsCe8PCSn-WjAXM_lscRwhYFyyafuOdkzJVlf03R7dwojGhyHWSLvi5kKpruW6_kWlzv5C1eNw8jYGHHzVnxnY3mBTzDnh8DQ-o2bdCfO0E-awE9VzuvfEZf4P_BEWhMAG</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Gleason, Kelly T</creator><creator>Powell, Danielle S</creator><creator>Wec, Aleksandra</creator><creator>Zou, Xingyuan</creator><creator>Gamper, Mary Jo</creator><creator>Peereboom, Danielle</creator><creator>Wolff, Jennifer L</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4203-6517</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3447-4450</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions</title><author>Gleason, Kelly T ; Powell, Danielle S ; Wec, Aleksandra ; Zou, Xingyuan ; Gamper, Mary Jo ; Peereboom, Danielle ; Wolff, Jennifer L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-2d024570154cfa0dda919347cf4dd4f7e01830e597876d55637358130c61140d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Computational linguistics</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Language processing</topic><topic>Medicine, Preventive</topic><topic>Natural language interfaces</topic><topic>Preventive health services</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gleason, Kelly T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Powell, Danielle S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wec, Aleksandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Xingyuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gamper, Mary Jo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peereboom, Danielle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolff, Jennifer L</creatorcontrib><collection>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>JAMIA open</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gleason, Kelly T</au><au>Powell, Danielle S</au><au>Wec, Aleksandra</au><au>Zou, Xingyuan</au><au>Gamper, Mary Jo</au><au>Peereboom, Danielle</au><au>Wolff, Jennifer L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions</atitle><jtitle>JAMIA open</jtitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>ooad077</spage><epage>ooad077</epage><pages>ooad077-ooad077</pages><issn>2574-2531</issn><eissn>2574-2531</eissn><abstract>Abstract
Objectives
We sought to understand the objectives, targeted populations, therapeutic elements, and delivery characteristics of patient portal interventions.
Materials and Methods
Following Arksey and O-Malley’s methodological framework, we conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published through June 2022 by hand and systematically searching PubMed, PSYCHInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. The search yielded 5403 manuscripts; 248 were selected for full-text review; 81 met the eligibility criteria for examining outcomes of a patient portal intervention.
Results
The 81 articles described: trials involving comparison groups (n = 37; 45.7%), quality improvement initiatives (n = 15; 18.5%), pilot studies (n = 7; 8.6%), and single-arm studies (n = 22; 27.2%). Studies were conducted in primary care (n = 33, 40.7%), specialty outpatient (n = 24, 29.6%), or inpatient settings (n = 4, 4.9%)—or they were deployed system wide (n = 9, 11.1%). Interventions targeted specific health conditions (n = 35, 43.2%), promoted preventive services (n = 19, 23.5%), or addressed communication (n = 19, 23.4%); few specifically sought to improve the patient experience (n = 3, 3.7%). About half of the studies (n = 40, 49.4%) relied on human involvement, and about half involved personalized (vs exclusively standardized) elements (n = 42, 51.8%). Interventions commonly collected patient-reported information (n = 36, 44.4%), provided education (n = 35, 43.2%), or deployed preventive service reminders (n = 14, 17.3%).
Discussion
This scoping review finds that most patient portal interventions have delivered education or facilitated collection of patient-reported information. Few interventions have involved pragmatic designs or been deployed system wide.
Conclusion
The patient portal is an important tool in real-world efforts to more effectively support patients, but interventions to date rely largely on evidence from consented participants rather than pragmatically implemented systems-level initiatives.
Lay Summary
The patient portal is often used by patients and their care partners to manage their healthcare. Some clinical care sites have deployed and evaluated portal-based interventions to better support patients and care partners in their healthcare. However, we know little about how portal-based interventions are delivered, what activities or tools are included to support the patient, and what conditions (eg, diabetes or high blood pressure) have been targeted. Given this, we conducted a search of the literature to understand what is known about patient portal interventions, which we describe in this article. We found that most studied interventions were conducted in primary care or specialty outpatient care; few interventions were conducted in a hospital setting. The majority of published interventions were conducted as part of a trial, rather than as a quality improvement initiative. Interventions primarily targeted specific health conditions (43.2%), promoted preventive services (23.5%), or addressed communication (23.4%). Interventions commonly collected information directly from patients, provided education, or deployed preventive service reminders. Based on these findings, we conclude that there is limited evidence regarding portal-based interventions implemented in a real-world setting, and that most have targeted education and/or preventive services.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4203-6517</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3447-4450</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2574-2531 |
ispartof | JAMIA open, 2023-10, Vol.6 (3), p.ooad077-ooad077 |
issn | 2574-2531 2574-2531 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10469545 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; PubMed Central |
subjects | Analysis Computational linguistics Health aspects Hypertension Language processing Medicine, Preventive Natural language interfaces Preventive health services Quality control Review |
title | Patient portal interventions: a scoping review of functionality, automation used, and therapeutic elements of patient portal interventions |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T05%3A19%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patient%20portal%20interventions:%20a%20scoping%20review%20of%20functionality,%20automation%20used,%20and%20therapeutic%20elements%20of%20patient%20portal%20interventions&rft.jtitle=JAMIA%20open&rft.au=Gleason,%20Kelly%20T&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=ooad077&rft.epage=ooad077&rft.pages=ooad077-ooad077&rft.issn=2574-2531&rft.eissn=2574-2531&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA776239019%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2860617529&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A776239019&rft_oup_id=10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad077&rfr_iscdi=true |