The patient portal: Power to the people

Perspectives of Patients About Immediate Access to Test Results Through an Online Patient Portal

Importance

The 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule mandates the immediate electronic availability of test results to patients, likely empowering them to better manage their health. Concerns remain about unintended effects of releasing abnormal test results to patients.

Objective

To assess patient and caregiver attitudes and preferences related to receiving immediately released test results through an online patient portal.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This large, multisite survey study was conducted at 4 geographically distributed academic medical centers in the US using an instrument adapted from validated surveys. The survey was delivered in May 2022 to adult patients and care partners who had accessed test results via an online patient portal account between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022.

Exposures

Access to test results via a patient portal between April 5, 2021, and April 4, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Responses to questions related to demographics, test type and result, reaction to result, notification experience and future preferences, and effect on health and well-being were aggregated. To evaluate characteristics associated with patient worry, logistic regression and pooled random-effects models were used to assess level of worry as a function of whether test results were perceived by patients as normal or not normal and whether patients were precounseled.

Results

Of 43 380 surveys delivered, there were 8139 respondents (18.8%). Most respondents were female (5129 [63.0%]) and spoke English as their primary language (7690 [94.5%]). The median age was 64 years (IQR, 50-72 years). Most respondents (7520 of 7859 [95.7%]), including 2337 of 2453 individuals (95.3%) who received nonnormal results, preferred to immediately receive test results through the portal. Few respondents (411 of 5473 [7.5%]) reported that reviewing results before they were contacted by a health care practitioner increased worry, though increased worry was more common among respondents who received abnormal results (403 of 2442 [16.5%]) than those whose results were normal (294 of 5918 [5.0%]). The result of the pooled model for worry as a function of test result normality was statistically significant (odds ratio [OR], 2.71; 99% CI, 1.96-3.74), suggesting an association between worry and nonnormal results. The result of the pooled model evaluating the association between worry and precounseling was not significant (OR, 0.70; 99% CI, 0.31-1.59).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this multisite survey study of patient attitudes and preferences toward receiving immediately released test results via a patient portal, most respondents preferred to receive test results via the patient portal despite viewing results prior to discussion with a health care professional. This preference persisted among patients with nonnormal results.

Why developers matter: The case of patient portals

Existing studies on patient data portals are informative with respect to the patient and physician perspectives, yet relatively little attention has been paid to the role of developers. This case study focuses on how developers view the meaning and purpose of patient portals and how their perspective differs from that of physicians. The findings show that developers and physicians have different views on whether and how the portals can help achieve transparency, efficiency, and patient empowerment. This misalignment emerges because each group makes sense of the portal through a different frame of how they see patient data, medical work, and patient behavior. The study also finds that developers cope with the frame differences by engaging in practices of coproducing, bypassing, and reframing. The implication of the study is that technological frame analysis needs to incorporate the growing complexity and institutional character of modern technology, the diversity of target groups it serves, and their corresponding frames. The study also suggests that developers, instead of being seen as mere operational IT support, may need to be seen as strategically important actor groups for healthcare organizations-since their practices matter for the strategic agenda of transforming healthcare into a more patient-centric practice.