Experiences from patients in mental healthcare accessing their electronic health records: results from a cross-national survey in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.
EHRs
Electronic health records
Mental healthcare
ORA
Online record access
PAEHR
Patient-accessible electronic health records
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Jul 2024
02 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
18
08
2023
accepted:
17
06
2024
medline:
3
7
2024
pubmed:
3
7
2024
entrez:
3
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients' online record access (ORA) enables patients to read and use their health data through online digital solutions. One such solution, patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been implemented in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. While accumulated research has pointed to many potential benefits of ORA, its application in mental healthcare (MHC) continues to be contested. The present study aimed to describe MHC users' overall experiences with national PAEHR services. The study analysed the MHC-part of the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey, a large-scale multi-country survey. The survey consisted of 45 questions, including demographic variables and questions related to users' experiences with ORA. We focused on the questions concerning positive experiences (benefits), negative experiences (errors, omissions, offence), and breaches of security and privacy. Participants were included in this analysis if they reported receiving mental healthcare within the past two years. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise data, and percentages were calculated on available data. 6,157 respondents were included. In line with previous research, almost half (45%) reported very positive experiences with ORA. A majority in each country also reported improved trust (at least 69%) and communication (at least 71%) with healthcare providers. One-third (29.5%) reported very negative experiences with ORA. In total, half of the respondents (47.9%) found errors and a third (35.5%) found omissions in their medical documentation. One-third (34.8%) of all respondents also reported being offended by the content. When errors or omissions were identified, about half (46.5%) reported that they took no action. There seems to be differences in how patients experience errors, omissions, and missing information between the countries. A small proportion reported instances where family or others demanded access to their records (3.1%), and about one in ten (10.7%) noted that unauthorised individuals had seen their health information. Overall, MHC patients reported more positive experiences than negative, but a large portion of respondents reported problems with the content of the PAEHR. Further research on best practice in implementation of ORA in MHC is therefore needed, to ensure that all patients may reap the benefits while limiting potential negative consequences.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patients' online record access (ORA) enables patients to read and use their health data through online digital solutions. One such solution, patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) have been implemented in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. While accumulated research has pointed to many potential benefits of ORA, its application in mental healthcare (MHC) continues to be contested. The present study aimed to describe MHC users' overall experiences with national PAEHR services.
METHODS
METHODS
The study analysed the MHC-part of the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey, a large-scale multi-country survey. The survey consisted of 45 questions, including demographic variables and questions related to users' experiences with ORA. We focused on the questions concerning positive experiences (benefits), negative experiences (errors, omissions, offence), and breaches of security and privacy. Participants were included in this analysis if they reported receiving mental healthcare within the past two years. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise data, and percentages were calculated on available data.
RESULTS
RESULTS
6,157 respondents were included. In line with previous research, almost half (45%) reported very positive experiences with ORA. A majority in each country also reported improved trust (at least 69%) and communication (at least 71%) with healthcare providers. One-third (29.5%) reported very negative experiences with ORA. In total, half of the respondents (47.9%) found errors and a third (35.5%) found omissions in their medical documentation. One-third (34.8%) of all respondents also reported being offended by the content. When errors or omissions were identified, about half (46.5%) reported that they took no action. There seems to be differences in how patients experience errors, omissions, and missing information between the countries. A small proportion reported instances where family or others demanded access to their records (3.1%), and about one in ten (10.7%) noted that unauthorised individuals had seen their health information.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, MHC patients reported more positive experiences than negative, but a large portion of respondents reported problems with the content of the PAEHR. Further research on best practice in implementation of ORA in MHC is therefore needed, to ensure that all patients may reap the benefits while limiting potential negative consequences.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38956493
doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05916-8
pii: 10.1186/s12888-024-05916-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
481Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Ammenwerth E, Schnell-Inderst P, Hoerbst A. The impact of electronic patient portals on patient care: a systematic review of controlled trials. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(6):e162. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2238
doi: 10.2196/jmir.2238
pubmed: 23183044
pmcid: 3510722
Salmi L, Blease C, Hägglund M, Walker J, DesRoches CM. US policy requires immediate release of records to patients. BMJ. 2021;372:n426. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n426
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n426
pubmed: 33602667
Metsallik J, Ross P, Draheim D, Piho G, editors. Ten years of the e-health system in Estonia. CEUR Workshop Proceedings; 2018.
Merimaa K, Vanker E. TERVISEPORTAAL. Ministry of Social Affairs. 2020.
Jormanainen V. Large-scale implementation and adoption of the Finnish national Kanta services in 2010–2017: a prospective, longitudinal, indicator-based study. Finnish J eHealth eWelfare. 2018;10(4):381–95. https://doi.org/10.23996/fjhw.74511
doi: 10.23996/fjhw.74511
Finland TSIIo. My Kanta Pages. 2022. https://www.kanta.fi/en/my-kanta-pages
Blease C, Salmi L, Rexhepi H, Hägglund M, DesRoches CM. Patients, clinicians and open notes: information blocking as a case of epistemic injustice. J Med Ethics. 2021;48(10):785–93. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-107275
doi: 10.1136/medethics-2021-107275
pubmed: 33990427
Bärkås A, Scandurra I, Rexhepi H, Blease C, Cajander Å, Hägglund M. Patients’ access to their psychiatric notes: current policies and practices in Sweden. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(17):9140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179140
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18179140
pubmed: 34501730
pmcid: 8431356
Fagerlund AJ, Kristiansen E, Johansen MA, Haumann K, Zanaboni P. Patient-accessible electronic medical records in mental health care: health professionals’ experiences after implementation. Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening; 2021.
Gregory J. Scandinavian approaches to participatory design. Int J Eng Educ. 2003;19(1):62–74.
United States Congress. (2016). Public Law 114-255-21st Century Cures Act. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ255/PLAW-114publ255.pdf
Wass S, Vimarlund V. The role of PAEHRs in patient involvement. J Med Syst. 2018;42(11):210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-018-1070-y
doi: 10.1007/s10916-018-1070-y
pubmed: 30255404
pmcid: 6153723
Benjamins J, Haveman-Nies A, Gunnink M, Goudkuil A, de Vet E. How the use of a patient-accessible health record contributes to patient-centered care: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(1):e17655. https://doi.org/10.2196/17655
doi: 10.2196/17655
pubmed: 33427683
pmcid: 7834934
Blease C, Dong Z, Torous J, Walker J, Hägglund M, DesRoches CM. Association of patients reading clinical notes with perception of medication adherence among persons with serious mental illness. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(3):e212823. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.2823
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.2823
pubmed: 33760088
pmcid: 7991965
Moll J, Rexhepi H, Cajander Å, Grünloh C, Huvila I, Hägglund M, et al. Patients’ experiences of accessing their electronic health records: national patient survey in Sweden. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(11):e278. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9492
doi: 10.2196/jmir.9492
pubmed: 30389647
pmcid: 6238103
Hägglund M, McMillan B, Whittaker R, Blease C. Patient empowerment through online access to health records. BMJ. 2022;378:e071531. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-0711531
doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-0711531
pubmed: 36175012
pmcid: 9518004
Bell SK, Mejilla R, Anselmo M, Darer JD, Elmore JG, Leveille S, et al. When doctors share visit notes with patients: a study of patient and doctor perceptions of documentation errors, safety opportunities and the patient-doctor relationship. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(4):262–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004697
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004697
pubmed: 27193032
Fagerlund AJ, Kristiansen E, Simonsen RA. Experiences from using patient accessible electronic health records - a qualitative study within Sámi mental health patients in Norway. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2022;81(1):2025682. https://doi.org/10.1080/22423982.2022.2025682
doi: 10.1080/22423982.2022.2025682
pubmed: 35037572
pmcid: 8765238
Schwarz J, Bärkås A, Blease C, Collins L, Hägglund M, Markham S, et al. Sharing clinical notes and electronic health records with people affected by mental health conditions: scoping review. JMIR Ment Heal. 2021;8(12):e34170. https://doi.org/10.2196/34170
doi: 10.2196/34170
Petersson L, Erlingsdóttir G. Open notes in Swedish psychiatric care (Part 1): survey among psychiatric care professionals. JMIR Ment Health. 2018;5(1):e11. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.9140
doi: 10.2196/mental.9140
pubmed: 29396386
pmcid: 5816262
Petersson L, Erlingsdóttir G. Open notes in Swedish psychiatric care (Part 2): survey among psychiatric care professionals. JMIR Ment Health. 2018;5(2):e10521. https://doi.org/10.2196/10521
doi: 10.2196/10521
pubmed: 29929946
pmcid: 6035347
Åkerstedt U, Cajander Å, Moll J, Ålander T. On threats and violence for staff and patient accessible electronic health records. Cogent Psychol. 2018;5(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2018.1518967
doi: 10.1080/23311908.2018.1518967
Bjoerke-Bertheussen J, Weibell M. Elektronisk Tilgang til psykiatrisk journal for pasienter. 2016; 1562–3.
Johansen MA, Kummervold PE, Sørensen T¸ Zanaboni P. Health professionals’ experience with patients accessing their electronic health records: results from an online survey. 2019;264:504–08. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI190273
Wang B, Kristiansen E, Fagerlund AJ, Zanaboni P, Hägglund M, Bärkås A et al. Patient experiences and perceptions with online access to electronic health records in Norway: cross-sectional survey comparing mental health and somatic patients. JMIR Preprints. 2023:47840. https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/47840
Bärkås A, Kharko A, Blease C, Cajander Å, Fagerlund AJ, Huvila I et al. Errors, omissions and offences in the health record of mental healthcare patients: results from a nationwide survey in Sweden. JMIR Preprints. 2023:47841. https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/47841
Storvik M. Begrenset journalinnsyn krever individuelle vurderinger. Tidsskrift for den norske legeforening. 2016.
Kristiansen E, Johansen MA, Zanaboni P. Healthcare personnels’ experience with patients’ online access to electronic health records: differences between professions, regions, and somatic and psychiatric healthcare. SHI 2019 Proceedings of the 17th Scandinavian Conference on Health Informatics, November 12–13, 2019, Oslo, Norway; 2019: Linköping University Electronic Press.
O’Neill S, Chimowitz H, Leveille S, Walker J. Embracing the new age of transparency: mental health patients reading their psychotherapy notes online. J Ment Health. 2019;28(5):527–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2019.1644490
doi: 10.1080/09638237.2019.1644490
pubmed: 31364902
Blease C, Kharko A, Hägglund M, O’Neill S, Wachenheim D, Salmi L, et al. The benefits and harms of open notes in mental health: a Delphi survey of international experts. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(10):e0258056. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258056
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258056
pubmed: 34644320
pmcid: 8513879
Blease C, Torous J, Kharko A, DesRoches CM, Harcourt K, O’Neill S, Salmi L, Wachenheim D, Hägglund M. Preparing patients and clinicians for open notes in mental health: qualitative inquiry of international experts. JMIR Mental Health. 2021;8(4):e27397.
doi: 10.2196/27397
pubmed: 33861202
pmcid: 8087962
European Commission. Europe’s Digital Decade: digital targets for 2030. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/europes-digital-decade-digital-targets-2030_en
Blease CR, O’Neill S, Walker J, Hägglund M, Torous J. Sharing notes with mental health patients: balancing risks with respect. Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(11):924–5.
doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30032-8
pubmed: 32059796
Hägglund M, Kharko A, Hagström J, Bärkås A, Blease C, Cajander Å et al. The NORDeHEALTH 2022 patient survey: a cross-sectional survey of national portal users in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. JMIR Preprints. 2023:47573. https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/47573
Maria, Hägglund. Nordic countries lead new initiative on patient access to EHRs. BMJ Journals: the BMJ Opinion; 2021 May 18. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/05/18/maria-hagglund-nordic-countries-lead-new-initiative-on-patient-access-to-ehrs/
Kujala S, Hörhammer I, Väyrynen A, Holmroos M, Nättiaho-Rönnholm M, Hägglund M, Johansen MA. Patients’ experiences of web-based access to electronic health records in Finland: cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(6):e37438. https://doi.org/10.2196/37438
doi: 10.2196/37438
pubmed: 35666563
pmcid: 9210208
Zanaboni P, Kummervold PE, Sørensen T, Johansen MA. Patient use and experience with online access to electronic health records in Norway: results from an online survey. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(2):e16144. https://doi.org/10.2196/16144
doi: 10.2196/16144
pubmed: 32031538
pmcid: 7055829
Denneson LM, Chen JI, Pisciotta M, Tuepker A, Dobscha SK. Patients’ positive and negative responses to reading mental health clinical notes online. Psychiatric Serv. 2018;69(5):593–96. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201700353
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201700353
Cromer R, Denneson LM, Pisciotta M, Williams H, Woods S, Dobscha SK. Trust in mental health clinicians among patients who access clinical notes online. Psychiatr Serv. 2017;68(5):520–23. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201600168
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201600168
pubmed: 28142383
pmcid: 5411285
Grünloh C, Cajander Å, Myreteg G. The record is our work tool!—physicians’ framing of a patient portal in Sweden. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(6):e167. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5705
doi: 10.2196/jmir.5705
pubmed: 27349531
pmcid: 4940602
Jilka SR, Callahan R, Sevdalis N, Mayer EK, Darzi A. Nothing about me without me: an interpretative review of patient accessible electronic health records. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(6):e161. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4446
doi: 10.2196/jmir.4446
pubmed: 26123476
pmcid: 4526966
Blease C, Cohen IG, Hoffman S. Sharing clinical notes: potential medical-legal benefits and risks. JAMA. 2022;327(8):717–18. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.23179
doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.23179
pubmed: 35119468
Lien L, Shaygani S. Digitalt journalinnsyn i psykisk helsevern. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening. 2023.
Blease C, McMillan B, Salmi L, Davidge G, Delbanco T. Adapting to transparent medical records: international experience with open notes. BMJ. 2022;379:e069861.
doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-069861
pubmed: 36410770
Peck P, Torous J, Shanahan M, Fossa A, Greenberg W. Patient access to electronic psychiatric records: a pilot study. Health Policy Technol. 2017;6(3):309–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2017.06.003
doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2017.06.003
Fernández L, Fossa A, Dong Z, Delbanco T, Elmore J, Fitzgerald P, et al. Words matter: what do patients find judgmental or offensive in outpatient notes? J Gen Intern Med. 2021;36(9):2571–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06432-7
doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06432-7
pubmed: 33528782
pmcid: 8390578
European Data Protection Board. Administrative fine imposed on psychotherapy centre Vastaamo for data protection violations. 2022 January 5. https://edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2022/administrative-fine-imposed-psychotherapy-centre-vastaamo-data-protection_en
Hägglund M, Scandurra I. Usability of the Swedish accessible electronic health record: qualitative survey study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2022;9(2):e37192. https://doi.org/10.2196/37192
doi: 10.2196/37192
pubmed: 35737444
pmcid: 9264119
Klein JW, Peacock S, Tsui JI, O’Neill SF, DesRoches CM, Elmore JG. Perceptions of primary care notes by patients with mental health diagnoses. Ann Fam Med. 2018;16(4):343–45. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2287
doi: 10.1370/afm.2287
pubmed: 29987083
pmcid: 6037508
Bärkås A, Kharko A, Åhlfeldt RM, Hägglund M. Patients’ experiences of unwanted access to their online health records. Stud Health Technol Inf. 2023;302:356–57. https://doi.org/10.3233/STHI230138
doi: 10.3233/STHI230138
Joinson A. Social desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires. Behav Res Methods Instruments Computers. 1999;31(3):433–8.
doi: 10.3758/BF03200723
Blease CR, O’Neill SF, Torous J, DesRoches CM, Hägglund M. Patient access to mental health notes: motivating evidence-informed ethical guidelines. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2021;209(4):265–9.
doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001303
pubmed: 33764954
The Norwegian Patient Right Act (LOV-1999-07-02-63) [in Norwegian]. (2001), Act § 4–3, HOD. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1999-07-02-63
Laki lääketieteellisestä. tutkimuksesta 9.4.1999/488 (Medical Research Act). 1999. FINLEX. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1999/19990488
The Act concerning the Ethical Review of Research Involving Humans (SFS. 2003:460) [in Swedish] Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet. https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/lag-2003460-om-etikprovning-av-forskning-som_sfs-2003-460/
National Framework for Patients’ Online Record Access [in. Swedish] 2016-09-23. Stockholm: Inera. https://inera.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OIJ/pages/438700782/Nationellt+ramverk+f+r+Journalen