Separate may not be equal: a preliminary investigation of clinical correlates of electronic psychiatric record accessibility in academic medical centers

A Closed-Loop Digital Health Tool to Improve Depression Care in Multiple Sclerosis: Iterative Design and Cross-Sectional Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial and its Impact on Depression Care

BACKGROUND

People living with multiple sclerosis (MS) face a higher likelihood of being diagnosed with a depressive disorder than the general population. Although many low-cost screening tools and evidence-based interventions exist, depression in people living with MS is underreported, underascertained by clinicians, and undertreated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to design a closed-loop tool to improve depression care for these patients. It would support regular depression screening, tie into the point of care, and support shared decision-making and comprehensive follow-up. After an initial development phase, this study involved a proof-of-concept pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) validation phase and a detailed human-centered design (HCD) phase.

METHODS

During the initial development phase, the technological infrastructure of a clinician-facing point-of-care clinical dashboard for MS management (BRIDGE) was leveraged to incorporate features that would support depression screening and comprehensive care (Care Technology to Ascertain, Treat, and Engage the Community to Heal Depression in people living with MS [MS CATCH]). This linked a patient survey, in-basket messages, and a clinician dashboard. During the pilot RCT phase, a convenience sample of 50 adults with MS was recruited from a single MS center with 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire scores of 5-19 (mild to moderately severe depression). During the routine MS visit, their clinicians were either asked or not to use MS CATCH to review their scores and care outcomes were collected. During the HCD phase, the MS CATCH components were iteratively modified based on feedback from stakeholders: people living with MS, MS clinicians, and interprofessional experts.

RESULTS

MS CATCH links 3 features designed to support mood reporting and ascertainment, comprehensive evidence-based management, and clinician and patient self-management behaviors likely to lead to sustained depression relief. In the pilot RCT (n=50 visits), visits in which the clinician was randomized to use MS CATCH had more notes documenting a discussion of depressive symptoms than those in which MS CATCH was not used (75% vs 34.6%; χ21=8.2; P=.004). During the HCD phase, 45 people living with MS, clinicians, and other experts participated in the design and refinement. The final testing round included 20 people living with MS and 10 clinicians including 5 not affiliated with our health system. Most scoring targets for likeability and usability, including perceived ease of use and perceived effectiveness, were met. Net Promoter Scale was 50 for patients and 40 for clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Created with extensive stakeholder feedback, MS CATCH is a closed-loop system aimed to increase communication about depression between people living with MS and their clinicians, and ultimately improve depression care. The pilot findings showed evidence of enhanced communication. Stakeholders also advised on trial design features of a full year long Department of Defense-funded feasibility and efficacy trial, which is now underway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05865405; http://tinyurl.com/4zkvru9x.

Pragmatic phase II clinical trial to improve depression care in a real-world diverse MS cohort from an academic MS centre in Northern California: MS CATCH study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Depression occurs in over 50% of individuals living with multiple sclerosis (MS) and can be treated using many modalities. Yet, it remains: under-reported by patients, under-ascertained by clinicians and under-treated. To enhance these three behaviours likely to promote evidence-based depression care, we engaged multiple stakeholders to iteratively design a first-in-kind digital health tool. The tool, MS CATCH (Care technology to Ascertain, Treat, and engage the Community to Heal depression in patients with MS), closes the communication loop between patients and clinicians. Between clinical visits, the tool queries patients monthly about mood symptoms, supports patient self-management and alerts clinicians to worsening mood via their electronic health record in-basket. Clinicians can also access an MS CATCH dashboard displaying patients' mood scores over the course of their disease, and providing comprehensive management tools (contributing factors, antidepressant pathway, resources in patient's neighbourhood). The goal of the current trial is to evaluate the clinical effect and usability of MS CATCH in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

MS CATCH is a single-site, phase II randomised, delayed start, trial enrolling 125 adults with MS and mild to moderately severe depression. Arm 1 will receive MS CATCH for 12 months, and arm 2 will receive usual care for 6 months, then MS CATCH for 6 months. Clinicians will be randomised to avoid practice effects. The effectiveness analysis is superiority intent-to-treat comparing MS CATCH to usual care over 6 months (primary outcome: evidence of screening and treatment; secondary outcome: Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale-Depression scores). The usability of the intervention will also be evaluated (primary outcome: adoption; secondary outcomes: adherence, engagement, satisfaction).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

University of California, San Francisco Institutional Review Board (22-36620). The findings of the study are planned to be shared through conferences and publishments in a peer-reviewed journal. The deidentified dataset will be shared with qualified collaborators on request, provision of CITI and other certifications, and data sharing agreement. We will share the results, once the data are complete and analysed, with the scientific community and patient/clinician participants through abstracts, presentations and manuscripts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05865405.

Borderline personality disorder, therapeutic privilege, integrated care: is it ethical to withhold a psychiatric diagnosis?

Once common, therapeutic privilege-the practice whereby a physician withholds diagnostic or prognostic information from a patient intending to protect the patient-is now generally seen as unethical. However, instances of therapeutic privilege are common in some areas of clinical psychiatry. We describe therapeutic privilege in the context of borderline personality disorder, discuss the implications of diagnostic non-disclosure on integrated care and offer recommendations to promote diagnostic disclosure for this patient population.

Impact of Electronic Health Records on Information Practices in Mental Health Contexts: Scoping Review

Background

The adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) and electronic medical records (EMRs) has been slow in the mental health context, partly because of concerns regarding the collection of sensitive information, the standardization of mental health data, and the risk of negatively affecting therapeutic relationships. However, EHRs and EMRs are increasingly viewed as critical to improving information practices such as the documentation, use, and sharing of information and, more broadly, the quality of care provided.

Objective

This paper aims to undertake a scoping review to explore the impact of EHRs on information practices in mental health contexts and also explore how sensitive information, data standardization, and therapeutic relationships are managed when using EHRs in mental health contexts.

Methods

We considered a scoping review to be the most appropriate method for this review because of the relatively recent uptake of EHRs in mental health contexts. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was conducted with no date restrictions for articles that described the use of EHRs, EMRs, or associated systems in the mental health context. One of the authors reviewed all full texts, with 2 other authors each screening half of the full-text articles. The fourth author mediated the disagreements. Data regarding study characteristics were charted. A narrative and thematic synthesis approach was taken to analyze the included studies’ results and address the research questions.

Results

The final review included 40 articles. The included studies were highly heterogeneous with a variety of study designs, objectives, and settings. Several themes and subthemes were identified that explored the impact of EHRs on information practices in the mental health context. EHRs improved the amount of information documented compared with paper. However, mental health–related information was regularly missing from EHRs, especially sensitive information. EHRs introduced more standardized and formalized documentation practices that raised issues because of the focus on narrative information in the mental health context. EHRs were found to disrupt information workflows in the mental health context, especially when they did not include appropriate templates or care plans. Usability issues also contributed to workflow concerns. Managing the documentation of sensitive information in EHRs was problematic; clinicians sometimes watered down sensitive information or chose to keep it in separate records. Concerningly, the included studies rarely involved service user perspectives. Furthermore, many studies provided limited information on the functionality or technical specifications of the EHR being used.

Conclusions

We identified several areas in which work is needed to ensure that EHRs benefit clinicians and service users in the mental health context. As EHRs are increasingly considered critical for modern health systems, health care decision-makers should consider how EHRs can better reflect the complexity and sensitivity of information practices and workflows in the mental health context.

Structure, content, unsafe abbreviations, and completeness of discharge summaries: A retrospective analysis in a University Hospital in Austria

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

The discharge summary (DS) is one of the most important instruments to transmit information to the treating general physician (GP). The objective of this study was to analyse important components of DS, structural characteristics as well as medical and general abbreviations.

METHOD

One hundred randomly selected DS from five different clinics were evaluated by five independent reviewers regarding content, structure, abbreviations and conformity to the Austrian Electronic Health Records (ELGA) using a structured case report form. Abbreviations of all 100 DS were extracted. All items were scored on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree" (or "not relevant"). Subsequently, the results were discussed among reviewers to achieve a consensus decision.

RESULTS

The mandatory fields, reason for admission and diagnosis at discharge were present in 80% and 98% of DS. The last medication was fully scored in 48% and the recommended medication in 94% of 100 DS. There were significant overall differences among clinics for nine mandatory items. In total, 750 unexplained abbreviations were found in 100 DS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, DS are often lacking important items. Particularly important are a detailed medication history and recommendations for further medication that should always be listed in each DS. It is thus necessary to design and implement changes that improve the completeness of DS. An important quality improvement can be achieved by avoiding the use of ambiguous abbreviations.

Perspectives on illness-related stigma and electronically sharing psychiatric health information by people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Electronic medical records (EMRs) facilitate more integrated and comprehensive care. Despite this, EMRs are used less frequently in psychiatry compared to other medical disciplines, in part due to concerns regarding stigma surrounding mental health. This paper explores the willingness to share medical information among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), who experience higher rates of psychiatric comorbidities compared to the general population, and the role that stigma plays in patient preferences.

METHODS

MS patients were surveyed about their co-occurring psychiatric and non-psychiatric diagnoses, willingness to share their health information electronically among their treating doctors, and levels of self and societal stigma associated with their diagnoses.

RESULTS

Participants were slightly more willing to share their non-psychiatric medical information vs. psychiatric information. Despite the presence of stigma decreasing patient willingness to share medical records, those with psychiatric co-occurring disorders, compared to those without, endorsed significantly greater willingness to electronically share their health records. The majority of diagnoses for which participants experienced the greatest difference in self vs. societal stigmas were psychiatric ones, including substance use, eating and mood disorders. Societal stigma strongly correlated with decreased non-psychiatric medication sharing, while self stigma was strongly correlated with decreased psychiatric medications sharing.

LIMITATIONS

Standardized scales were not used to assess patient stigma and there is a potential lack of generalizability of results beyond patients with MS.

CONCLUSIONS

These insights into patient preferences toward sharing their medical information should inform decisions to implement EMRs, particularly for patient populations experiencing higher than average levels of psychiatric comorbidities.

Electronic Health Information Exchange At Discharge From Inpatient Psychiatric Care In Acute Care Hospitals

To address the complex health care needs of patients with mental illness-who commonly have co-occurring medical conditions and substance use disorders-it is critically important for providers to use electronic health records (EHRs) for health information exchange (HIE) when patients are transferred from inpatient psychiatric units in acute care hospitals. Efficient and timely HIE is necessary to ensure that patients receive adequate and informed follow-up care. This study examined the percentage of inpatient psychiatric units that reported using EHRs for HIE at transfers of care and hospital characteristics associated with that use. We linked national data from the Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting Program of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and state mental health privacy laws. In 2016 the use of electronic HIE upon transfer from psychiatric units lagged behind the corresponding overall use rates from acute care hospitals (56.3 percent versus 88 percent), with wide variation across states. Hospital size and accountable care organization participation were associated with electronic HIE, but a state's having mental health privacy laws more stringent than the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act did not. Given these results, policy efforts to incentivize the use of electronic HIE in psychiatric settings should be strengthened.

Sharing Psychotherapy Notes with Patients: Therapists' Attitudes and Experiences

Evidence suggests that the practice of sharing clinicians' notes with patients via online patient portals may increase patient engagement and improve patient-clinician relationships while requiring little change in providers' workflow. Authors examined clinical social workers' experiences and attitudes related to open psychotherapy notes using focus groups and telephone interviews. Twenty-four of 29 eligible therapists agreed to open their notes to patients, and nine participated in this study. Participants were generally positive about their experiences and reported few disruptions to their workload or practice. However, they were hesitant to bring up notes to patients during sessions, and they discussed the benefits of open therapy notes mostly hypothetically. The five therapists who did not share notes worried that open notes would be detrimental to therapeutic relationships, patient well-being, and workflow. However, the concern they discussed most often related to the electronic health record rather than to open notes, because therapy notes are visible to all authorized clinicians as part of the general medical record. Future research is needed to deepen our understanding of the risks and benefits of open psychotherapy notes and to inform development of training programs to support therapists in opening notes.

Patient Privacy Perspectives on Health Information Exchange in a Mental Health Context: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

The privacy of patients with mental health conditions is prominent in health information exchange (HIE) discussions, given that their potentially sensitive personal health information (PHI) may be electronically shared for various health care purposes. Currently, the patient privacy perspective in the mental health context is not well understood because of the paucity of in-depth patient privacy research; however, the evidence suggests that patient privacy perspectives are more nuanced than what has been assumed in the academic and health care community.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to generate an understanding on how patients with mental health conditions feel about privacy in the context of HIE in Canada. This study also sought to identify the factors underpinning their privacy perspectives and explored how their perspectives influenced their attitudes toward HIE.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients at a Canadian academic hospital for addictions and mental health. Guided by the Antecedent-Privacy Concern-Outcome macro-model, interview transcripts underwent deductive and inductive thematic analyses.

RESULTS

We interviewed 14 participants. Their privacy concerns varied, depending on the participant's privacy experiences and health care perceptions. Media reports of privacy breaches and hackers had little impact on participants' privacy concerns because of a fatalistic belief that privacy breaches are a reality in the digital age. Rather, direct observations and experiences with the mistreatment of PHI in health care settings caused concern. Decisions to trust others with PHI depended on past experiences with the individual (or institution) and health care needs. Participants had little knowledge of patient privacy rights and legislation but were willing to participate in HIE because of perceived individual and societal benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

This study introduces evidence that patients with mental health conditions would support HIE. Participants were pragmatic, supporting HIE because they wanted the best care possible. They also understood that their PHI was critical in supporting the single-payer Canadian health care system. Participant health care experiences informed their privacy perspectives, trust, and PHI sharing attitudes-all accentuating the importance of the patient experience in building trust in HIE. Their lack of knowledge about patient rights and PHI uses highlights the degree of trust they have in the health care system to protect their privacy. These findings suggest that the patient privacy discourse should extend beyond the oft-cited barrier of patient privacy concerns to include discussions about building trust, communicating the benefits of HIE, and improving patient experiences. Although our findings are in the Canadian context, this study highlights the importance of engaging patients in privacy policy discussions, regardless of jurisdiction, to ensure their nuanced perspectives are reflected in policy decisions on their PHI.

Impact of a specialist mental health pharmacy team on medicines optimisation in primary care for patients on a severe mental illness register: a pilot study

Objective

Medication arrangements for patients with severe mental illness (SMI), including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, can be complex. Some have shared care between primary and secondary services while others have little specialist input. This study investigated the contribution a specialist mental health clinical pharmacy team could make to medicines optimisation for patients on the SMI register in primary care. Research shows that specialist mental health pharmacists improve care in inpatient settings. However, little is known about their potential impact in primary care.

Method

Five general practice surgeries were allocated half a day per week of a specialist pharmacist and technician for 12 months. The technician reviewed primary and secondary care records for discrepancies. Records were audited for high-dose or multiple antipsychotics, physical health monitoring and adherence. Issues were referred to the pharmacist for review. Surgery staff were encouraged to refer psychotropic medication queries to the team. Interventions were recorded and graded.

Results

316/472 patients on the SMI register were prescribed antipsychotics or mood stabilisers. 23 (7%) records were updated with missing clozapine and depot information. Interventions by the pharmacist included clarifying discharge information (12/104), reviewing high-dose and multiple antipsychotic prescribing (18/104), correcting errors (10/104), investigating adherence issues (16/104), following up missing health checks (22/104) and answering queries from surgery staff (23/104). Five out of six interventions possibly preventing hospital admission were for referral of non-adherent patients.

Conclusion

The pharmacy team found a variety of issues including incomplete medicines reconciliation, adherence issues, poor communication, drug errors and the need for specialist advice. The expertise of the team enabled timely resolution of issues and bridges were built between primary and secondary care.

Integrating Neuroscience Knowledge and Neuropsychiatric Skills Into Psychiatry: The Way Forward

Increasing the integration of neuroscience knowledge and neuropsychiatric skills into general psychiatric practice would facilitate expanded approaches to diagnosis, formulation, and treatment while positioning practitioners to utilize findings from emerging brain research. There is growing consensus that the field of psychiatry would benefit from more familiarity with neuroscience and neuropsychiatry. Yet there remain numerous factors impeding the integration of these domains of knowledge into general psychiatry.The authors make recommendations to move the field forward, focusing on the need for advocacy by psychiatry and medical organizations and changes in psychiatry education at all levels. For individual psychiatrists, the recommendations target obstacles to attaining expanded neuroscience and neuropsychiatry education and barriers stemming from widely held, often unspoken beliefs. For the system of psychiatric care, recommendations address the conceptual and physical separation of psychiatry from medicine, overemphasis on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and on psychopharmacology, and different systems in medicine and psychiatry for handling reimbursement and patient records. For psychiatry residency training, recommendations focus on expanding neuroscience/neuropsychiatry faculty and integrating neuroscience education throughout the curriculum.Psychiatry traditionally concerns itself with helping individuals construct meaningful life narratives. Brain function is one of the fundamental determinants of individuality. It is now possible for psychiatrists to integrate knowledge of neuroscience into understanding the whole person by asking, What person has this brain? How does this brain make this person unique? How does this brain make this disorder unique? What treatment will help this disorder in this person with this brain?

The Stigma Complex

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, research on stigma has continued. Building on conceptual and empirical work, the recent period clarifies new types of stigmas, expansion of measures, identification of new directions, and increasingly complex levels. Standard beliefs have been challenged, the relationship between stigma research and public debates reconsidered, and new scientific foundations for policy and programs suggested. We begin with a summary of the most recent Annual Review articles on stigma, which reminded sociologists of conceptual tools, informed them of developments from academic neighbors, and claimed findings from the early period of "resurgence." Continued (even accelerated) progress has also revealed a central problem. Terms and measures are often used interchangeably, leading to confusion and decreasing accumulated knowledge. Drawing from this work but focusing on the past 14 years of stigma research (including mental illness, sexual orientation, HIV/AIDS, and race/ethnicity), we provide a theoretical architecture of concepts (e.g., prejudice, experienced/received discrimination), drawn together through a stigma process (i.e., stigmatization), based on four theoretical premises. Many characteristics of the mark (e.g., discredited, concealable) and variants (i.e., stigma types and targets) become the focus of increasingly specific and multidimensional definitions. Drawing from complex and systems science, we propose a stigma complex, a system of interrelated, heterogeneous parts bringing together insights across disciplines to provide a more realistic and complicated sense of the challenge facing research and change efforts. The Framework Integrating Normative Influences on Stigma (FINIS) offers a multilevel approach that can be tailored to stigmatized statuses. Finally, we outline challenges for the next phase of stigma research, with the goal of continuing scientific activity that enhances our understanding of stigma and builds the scientific foundation for efforts to reduce intolerance.

Promoting physical health for people with schizophrenia by reducing disparities in medical and dental care

OBJECTIVE

Acquiring a diagnosis of schizophrenia reduces life expectancy for many reasons including poverty, difficulties in communication, side-effects of medication and access to care. This mortality gap is driven by natural deaths; cardiovascular disease is a major cause, but outcomes for people with severe mental illness are worse for many physical health conditions, including cancer, fractures and complications of surgery. We set out to examine the literature on disparities in medical and dental care experienced by people with schizophrenia and suggest possible approaches to improving health.

METHOD

This narrative review used a targeted literature search to identify the literature on physical health disparities in schizophrenia.

RESULTS

There is evidence of inequitable access to and/or uptake of physical and dental health care by those with schizophrenia.

CONCLUSION

The goal was to reduce the mortality gap through equity of access to all levels of health care, including acute care, long-term condition management, preventative medicine and health promotion. We suggest solutions to promote health, wellbeing and longevity in this population, prioritising identification of and intervention for risk factors for premature morbidity and mortality. Shared approaches are vital, while joint education of clinicians will help break down the artificial mind-body divide.

Patient preferences in controlling access to their electronic health records: a prospective cohort study in primary care

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have measured individuals' willingness to share personal information stored in electronic health records (EHRs) with health care providers, but none has measured preferences among patients when they are allowed to determine the parameters of provider access.

METHODS

Patients were given the ability to control access by doctors, nurses, and other staff in a primary care clinic to personal information stored in an EHR. Patients could restrict access to all personal data or to specific types of sensitive information, and could restrict access for a specific time period. Patients also completed a survey regarding their understanding of and opinions regarding the process.

RESULTS

Of 139 eligible patients who were approached, 105 (75.5 %) were enrolled, and preferences were collected from all 105 (100 %). Sixty patients (57 %) did not restrict access for any providers. Of the 45 patients (43 %) who chose to limit the access of at least one provider, 36 restricted access only to all personal information in the EHR, while nine restricted access of some providers to a subset of the their personal information. Thirty-four (32.3 %) patients blocked access to all personal information by all doctors, nurses, and/or other staff, 26 (24.8 %) blocked access by all doctors and/or nurses, and five (4.8 %) denied access to all doctors, nurses, and staff.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant minority of patients chose to restrict access by their primary care providers to personal information contained in an EHR, and few chose to restrict access to specific types of information. More research is needed to identify patient goals and understanding of the implications when facing decisions of this sort, and to identify the impact of patient education regarding information contained in EHRs and their use in the clinical care setting.

Lessons learned from implementing a pilot RCT of transitional care model for individuals with serious mental illness

We adapted an evidence-based transitional care model for older adults being released from acute care hospitals for patients with serious mental illness and medical co-morbidities being discharged from two psychiatric units of an acute care hospital (TCare) and evaluated implementation issues. An advisory group (AG) of community stakeholders assessed barriers and facilitators of a 90-day T-Care intervention delivered by a psychiatric nurse practitioner (NP) in the context of conducting a pilot randomized controlled trial. Minutes of AG and case narratives by NP of 20 intervention participants were content analyzed. Patients with immediate and pressing physical health problems were most receptive and actively utilized the service. Provider barriers consisted of communication and privacy issues making it difficult to contact patients in mental health facilities. In contrast, the NP was accepted and valued in the physical health arena. Psychosocial needs and relationship issues were demanding, and we recommend a team approach for TCare with the addition of a social worker, peer provider, and consulting psychiatrist for severely mentally ill patients being released from an acute physical health hospitalization.