Patients' Experiences of a National Patient Portal and Its Usability: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

System Usability Scale electronic health record national survey patient experiences patient portal patient-accessible electronic health records perceived usability

Journal

Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 06 2023
Historique:
received: 24 01 2023
accepted: 30 05 2023
revised: 21 04 2023
medline: 3 7 2023
pubmed: 30 6 2023
entrez: 30 6 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Patient portals not only provide patients with access to electronic health records (EHRs) and other digital health services, such as prescription renewals, but they can also improve patients' self-management, engagement with health care professionals (HCPs), and care processes. However, these benefits depend on patients' willingness to use patient portals and, ultimately, their experiences with the usefulness and ease of use of the portals. This study aimed to investigate the perceived usability of a national patient portal and the relationship of patients' very positive and very negative experiences with perceived usability. The study was aimed to be the first step in developing an approach for benchmarking the usability of patient portals in different countries. Data were collected through a web-based survey of the My Kanta patient portal's logged-in patient users in Finland from January 24, 2022, to February 14, 2022. Respondents were asked to rate the usability of the patient portal, and the ratings were used to calculate approximations of the System Usability Scale (SUS) score. Open-ended questions asked the patients about their positive and negative experiences with the patient portal. The statistical analysis included multivariate regression, and the experience narratives were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Of the 1,262,708 logged-in patient users, 4719 responded to the survey, giving a response rate of 0.37%. The patient portal's usability was rated as good, with a mean SUS score of 74.3 (SD 14.0). Reporting a very positive experience with the portal was positively associated with perceived usability (β=.51; P<.001), whereas reporting a very negative experience was negatively associated with perceived usability (β=-1.28; P<.001). These variables explained 23% of the variation in perceived usability. The information provided and a lack of information were the most common positive and negative experiences. Furthermore, specific functionalities, such as prescription renewal and the ease of using the patient portal, were often mentioned as very positive experiences. The patients also mentioned negative emotions, such as anger and frustration, as part of their very negative experiences. The study offers empirical evidence about the significant role of individual experiences when patients are evaluating the usability of patient portals. The results suggest that positive and negative experiences provide relevant information that can be used for improving the patient portal's usability. Usability should be improved so that patients receive information efficiently, easily, and quickly. Respondents would also appreciate interactive features in the patient portal.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Patient portals not only provide patients with access to electronic health records (EHRs) and other digital health services, such as prescription renewals, but they can also improve patients' self-management, engagement with health care professionals (HCPs), and care processes. However, these benefits depend on patients' willingness to use patient portals and, ultimately, their experiences with the usefulness and ease of use of the portals.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to investigate the perceived usability of a national patient portal and the relationship of patients' very positive and very negative experiences with perceived usability. The study was aimed to be the first step in developing an approach for benchmarking the usability of patient portals in different countries.
METHODS
Data were collected through a web-based survey of the My Kanta patient portal's logged-in patient users in Finland from January 24, 2022, to February 14, 2022. Respondents were asked to rate the usability of the patient portal, and the ratings were used to calculate approximations of the System Usability Scale (SUS) score. Open-ended questions asked the patients about their positive and negative experiences with the patient portal. The statistical analysis included multivariate regression, and the experience narratives were analyzed using inductive content analysis.
RESULTS
Of the 1,262,708 logged-in patient users, 4719 responded to the survey, giving a response rate of 0.37%. The patient portal's usability was rated as good, with a mean SUS score of 74.3 (SD 14.0). Reporting a very positive experience with the portal was positively associated with perceived usability (β=.51; P<.001), whereas reporting a very negative experience was negatively associated with perceived usability (β=-1.28; P<.001). These variables explained 23% of the variation in perceived usability. The information provided and a lack of information were the most common positive and negative experiences. Furthermore, specific functionalities, such as prescription renewal and the ease of using the patient portal, were often mentioned as very positive experiences. The patients also mentioned negative emotions, such as anger and frustration, as part of their very negative experiences.
CONCLUSIONS
The study offers empirical evidence about the significant role of individual experiences when patients are evaluating the usability of patient portals. The results suggest that positive and negative experiences provide relevant information that can be used for improving the patient portal's usability. Usability should be improved so that patients receive information efficiently, easily, and quickly. Respondents would also appreciate interactive features in the patient portal.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37389909
pii: v25i1e45974
doi: 10.2196/45974
pmc: PMC10365631
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e45974

Informations de copyright

©Saija Simola, Iiris Hörhammer, Yuhui Xu, Annika Bärkås, Asbjørn Johansen Fagerlund, Josefin Hagström, Mari Holmroos, Maria Hägglund, Monika Alise Johansen, Bridget Kane, Anna Kharko, Isabella Scandurra, Sari Kujala. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 30.06.2023.

Références

Int J Med Inform. 2022 Mar 22;162:104750
pubmed: 35339888
Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Mar;65(632):e141-51
pubmed: 25733435
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Feb 10;17(2):e44
pubmed: 25669240
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Apr 01;24(e1):e47-e54
pubmed: 27402138
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jan 11;23(1):e17655
pubmed: 33427683
JMIR Hum Factors. 2022 Jun 23;9(2):e37192
pubmed: 35737444
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jul 16;23(7):e25368
pubmed: 34269687
Int J Med Inform. 2009 Sep;78(9):588-604
pubmed: 19482542
J Pers Assess. 2003 Feb;80(1):99-103
pubmed: 12584072
Nurs Ethics. 2021 Mar;28(2):253-271
pubmed: 32930041
Inform Health Soc Care. 2021 Dec 2;46(4):399-411
pubmed: 33787438
JMIR Res Protoc. 2014 Nov 26;3(4):e67
pubmed: 25428028
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;198:32-9
pubmed: 24825682
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jun 23;17(6):e148
pubmed: 26104044
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Jan;97:221-228
pubmed: 27919380
J Med Internet Res. 2019 May 06;21(5):e13876
pubmed: 31066717
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Aug 27;23(8):e19820
pubmed: 34448712
JMIR Diabetes. 2018 Nov 06;3(4):e11199
pubmed: 30401665
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jun 6;24(6):e37438
pubmed: 35666563
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Oct 1;20(10):e269
pubmed: 30287416
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Apr 01;24(e1):e173-e177
pubmed: 27413120
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Mar;22(2):380-9
pubmed: 25352570
Appl Clin Inform. 2019 Jan;10(1):10-18
pubmed: 30602196
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Jan;97:266-281
pubmed: 27919385
JMIR Ment Health. 2021 Dec 14;8(12):e34170
pubmed: 34904956
Int J Med Inform. 2019 Aug;128:24-31
pubmed: 31160008
JMIR Res Protoc. 2022 Jun 15;11(6):e36158
pubmed: 35704386
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Sep;93:57-69
pubmed: 27435948
JMIR Med Inform. 2022 Apr 22;10(4):e37500
pubmed: 35404831
BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 29;6(1):e010034
pubmed: 26826154
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Feb 6;22(2):e13622
pubmed: 32044753
Int J Med Inform. 2019 Jun;126:95-104
pubmed: 31029270
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Mar;87:15-26
pubmed: 26806708
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Nov 01;20(11):e278
pubmed: 30389647
Health Informatics J. 2018 Jun;24(2):115-124
pubmed: 27440056
J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 17;18(5):e112
pubmed: 27188953
J Med Syst. 2018 Sep 25;42(11):210
pubmed: 30255404
Digit Health. 2018 Sep 02;4:2055207618797883
pubmed: 30186619
Int J Med Inform. 2018 Feb;110:10-18
pubmed: 29331248
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Aug 7;17(1):534
pubmed: 28784173
Int J Med Inform. 2009 May;78(5):340-53
pubmed: 19046928
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Feb 7;22(2):e16144
pubmed: 32031538
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Aug 20;21(8):13743
pubmed: 31432782
J Biomed Inform. 2017 Oct;74:104-122
pubmed: 28893671

Auteurs

Saija Simola (S)

Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.

Iiris Hörhammer (I)

Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.

Yuhui Xu (Y)

Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.

Annika Bärkås (A)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Asbjørn Johansen Fagerlund (AJ)

Norwegian Centre for E-health Research, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Josefin Hagström (J)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Mari Holmroos (M)

Kela, The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, Helsinki, Finland.

Maria Hägglund (M)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Monika Alise Johansen (MA)

Norwegian Centre for E-health Research, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Bridget Kane (B)

Karlstad University Business School, Karlstad, Sweden.

Anna Kharko (A)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom.

Isabella Scandurra (I)

Center for Empirical Research on Information Systems, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.

Sari Kujala (S)

Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH