Patient Perspectives on Advance Care Planning via a Patient Portal

Systems for electronic documentation and sharing of advance care planning preferences: a scoping review

Digital approaches to support advance care planning (ACP) documentation and sharing are increasingly being used, with a lack of research to characterise their design, content, and use. This study aimed to characterise how digital approaches are being used to support ACP documentation and sharing internationally. A scoping review was performed in accordance with the JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute) guidelines and the PRISMA 2020 checklist, prospectively registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/xnrg3). MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ACM Digital, IEEE Xplore and CINAHL were searched in February 2023. Only publications in English, published from 2008 onwards were considered. Eligibility criteria included a focus on ACP and electronic systems. Out of 2,393 records, 34 reports were included, predominantly from the USA (76.5%). ACP documentation is typically stored in electronic health records (EHRs) (67.6%), with a third (32.4%) enabling limited patient access. Non-standard approaches (n = 15;44.1%) were the commonest study design of included reports, with outcome measures focusing on the influence of systems on the documentation (i.e. creation, quantity, quality, frequency or timing) of ACP information (n = 23;67.6%). Digital approaches to support ACP are being implemented and researched internationally with an evidence base dominated by non-standard study designs. Future research is needed to extend outcome measurement to consider aspects of care quality and explore whether the content of existing systems aligns with aspects of care that are valued by patients.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of patient education through patient portals

Objective

The objective of this study was to systematically review all literature studying the effect of patient education on patient engagement through patient portals.

Introduction

Patient portals provide patients access to health records, lab results, medication refills, educational materials, secure messaging, appointment scheduling, and telehealth visits, allowing patients to take a more active role in their health care decisions and management. A debate remains around whether these additional aids actually improve patient engagement and increase their ability to manage their own health conditions. This systematic review looks specifically at the effect of educational materials included in patient portals.

Materials and Methods

In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, the literature search was mapped across 5 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychINFO, Embase), and implemented on June 2, 2020.

Results

Fifty-two studies were included in the review. Forty-six (88.5%) reported rates of patient utilization of educational resources in the patient portal. Thirty (57.9%) shared patients' perceptions of the usefulness of the education materials. Twenty-one (40.4%) reported changes in health outcomes following educational interventions through the patient portal. This review found that efforts are indeed being made to raise awareness of educational resources in patient portals, that patients are increasingly utilizing these resources, that patients are finding them useful, and that they are improving health outcomes.

Conclusion

It seems that patient portals are becoming a powerful tool for patient education and engagement, and show promise as a means of achieving the quadruple aim of healthcare. Moving forward, research should establish more uniform methods of measurement in order to strengthen the literature surrounding the effectiveness of patient education through patient portals.

Patient Portals to Support Care Partner Engagement in Adolescent and Adult Populations: A Scoping Review

IMPORTANCE

Family and other unpaid care partners may bridge accessibility challenges in interacting with the patient portal, but the extent and nature of this involvement is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

To inform an emerging research agenda directed at more purposeful inclusion of care partners within the context of digital health equity by (1) quantifying care partners' uptake and use of the patient portal in adolescent and adult patients, (2) identifying factors involving care partners' portal use across domains of the System Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model, and (3) assessing evidence of perceived or actual outcomes of care partners' portal use.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Following Arksey and O'Malley's methodologic framework, a scoping review of manuscripts published February 1 and March 22, 2022, was conducted by hand and a systematic search of PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, and Web of Science. The search yielded 278 articles; 125 were selected for full-text review and 41 were included.

FINDINGS

Few adult patient portal accounts had 1 or more formally registered care partners (<3% in 7 of 7 articles), but care partners commonly used the portal (8 of 13 contributing articles reported >30% use). Care partners less often authored portal messages with their own identity credentials (<3% of portal messages in 3 of 3 articles) than with patient credentials (20%-60% of portal messages in 3 of 5 articles). Facilitators of care partner portal use included markers of patient vulnerability (13 articles), care partner characteristics (15 articles; being female, family, and competent in health system navigation), and task-based factors pertaining to ease of information access and care coordination. Environmental (26 articles) and process factors (19 articles, eg, organizational portal registration procedures, protection of privacy, and functionality) were identified as influential to care partner portal use, but findings were nuanced and precluded reporting on effects. Care partner portal use was identified as contributing to both patient and care partner insight into patient health (9 articles), activation (7 articles), continuity of care (8 articles), and convenience (6 articles).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this scoping review, care partners were found to be infrequently registered for the patient portal and more often engaged in portal use with patient identity credentials. Formally registering care partners for the portal was identified as conferring potential benefits for patients, care partners, and care quality.

Development of an Advance Care Planning Portal-Based Tool for Community-Dwelling Persons Living With Cognitive Impairment: The ACPVoice Tool

Background: Patient portals can be an innovative and efficient way to engage patients in advance care planning (ACP). However, comprehension and judgment in older adults with cognitive impairment presents several barriers and challenges to engaging in new technology. Our objective was to develop an ACP portal-based tool (ACPVoice) for community-dwelling persons living with cognitive impairment (PLCI) by engaging end-users in the design process. Methods: Two rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted to identify and resolve cognitive issues related to comprehension, judgment, response, and to assess content validity. Purposive sampling was used with the goal of enrolling 15 different participants (five with mild cognitive impairment and five dyads (those with mild dementia and their care partner) in each round to assess respondents' understanding of questions related to advance care planning to be administered via the patient portal. Results: Twenty PLCI (mean age 78.4, 10 females [50%]) and ten care partners (mean age 60.9, 9 females [90%]) completed cognitive interviews between May 2021 and October 2021. The mean Mini-Mental State Examination score for PLCI was 25.6 (SD 2.6). Unclear wording and undefined vague and/or unfamiliar terms were the major issues identified. Revisions to item wording, response options, and instructions were made to improve question comprehension and response as well as navigational ease. Conclusion: Minor changes to the wording, format, and response options substantially improved respondents' ability to interpret the item content of the ACPVoice tool. Dissemination and implementation of the ACPVoice tool could help to engage community-dwelling PLCI in ACP discussions.

Perceived Barriers and Facilitators of Implementing a Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Communication With Older Adults With and Without Dementia (SHARING Choices) in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

INTRODUCTION

Implementing patient- and family-centered communication strategies has proven challenging in primary care, particularly for persons with dementia. To address this, we designed SHARING Choices, a multicomponent intervention combining patient and family partnered agenda setting, electronic portal access, and supports for advance care planning (ACP). This qualitative descriptive study describes factors affecting SHARING Choices implementation within primary care.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews or focus groups with patient/family dyads (family, friends, unpaid caregivers) and primary care stakeholders (clinicians, staff, administrators) elicited perceived barriers and facilitators of SHARING Choices implementation. Field notes and interview transcripts were coded using template analysis along the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs. Content analysis identified themes not readily categorized within CFIR.

RESULTS

About 22 dyads, including 14 with cognitive impairment, and 30 stakeholders participated in the study. Participants were receptive to the SHARING Choices components. Enablers of SHARING Choices included adaptability of the intervention, purposive engagement of family (particularly for patients with dementia), consistency with organizational priorities, and the relative advantage of SHARING Choices compared to current practices. Perceived barriers to implementation included intervention complexity, space constraints, workflow, and ACP hesitancy. The ACP facilitator was perceived as supportive in addressing individual and organizational implementation barriers including patient health and technology literacy and clinician time for ACP discussions.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, family, and primary care clinicians endorsed the objectives and individual components of SHARING Choices. Strategies to enhance adoption were to simplify materials, streamline processes, leverage existing workflows, and embed ACP facilitators within the primary care team.

Characteristics of Patients and Proxy Caregivers Using Patient Portals in the Setting of Serious Illness and End of Life

Background: There are few studies examining the usage and utility of patient portals among seriously ill and end-of-life populations and their caregivers. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe portal user characteristics among patients and their caregivers (proxy login) at two time points: (1) the 12 months following an electronic medical record flag for serious illness and (2) during the last 12 months of life. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of Kaiser Permanente Colorado (KPCO) patients with serious illness, as defined by Kaiser Permanente's prognostic algorithm, and their proxy caregivers was performed for the two time periods. Use was characterized as (1) the discrete number of days the portal was used and (2) the number of days that portal features were accessed. Differences in use by user characteristics were assessed. Results: Patients flagged for serious illness (N = 6129) were 70.4 ± 14.2 years of age, and used the portal on average 50.4 days. Patients (N = 6517) in the last year of life were 76.7 ± 13.7 years of age and used the portal on average 43 days. Caregiver proxy use of the portal was low in both cohorts. Patients who were older, female, non-White, and healthier were less likely to use the portal. Conclusions: In comparison with overall KPCO portal use and recent patient portal studies examining use patterns, patient portal use was high among patients flagged with serious illness and nearing the end of life. However, because use was associated with age, gender, and race, addressing barriers to portal adoption among underserved populations and caregiver proxies is key to better leveraging patient portal systems for palliative and end-of-life care.

Patient Portals to Support Palliative and End-of-Life Care: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Although patient portals are widely used for health promotion, little is known about the use of palliative care and end-of-life (PCEOL) portal tools available for patients and caregivers.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify and assess the user perspectives of PCEOL portal tools available to patients and caregivers described and evaluated in the literature.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of the academic literature directed by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) extension for Scoping Review and searched three databases. Sources were included if they reported the development or testing of a feature, resource, tool, or intervention; focused on at least one PCEOL domain defined by the National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative Care; targeted adults with serious illness or caregivers; and were offered via a patient portal tethered to an electronic medical record. We independently screened the titles and abstracts (n=796) for eligibility. Full-text (84/796, 10.6%) sources were reviewed. We abstracted descriptions of the portal tool name, content, targeted population, and reported user acceptability for each tool from included sources (n=19).

RESULTS

In total, 19 articles describing 12 tools were included, addressing the following PCEOL domains: ethical or legal (n=5), physical (n=5), and psychological or psychiatric (n=2). No tools for bereavement or hospice care were identified. Studies have reported high acceptability of tools among users; however, few sources commented on usability among older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

PCEOL patient portal tools are understudied. As medical care increasingly moves toward virtual platforms, future research should investigate the usability and acceptability of PCEOL patient portal resources and evaluate their impact on health outcomes.

Views of advanced cancer patients, families, and oncologists on initiating and engaging in advance care planning: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) is a process by which patients reflect upon their goals, values and beliefs to allow them to make decisions about their future medical treatment that align with their goals and values, improving patient-centered care. Despite this, ACP is underutilized and is reported as one of the most difficult processes of oncology. We sought to: 1) explore patients' and families' understanding, experience and reflections on ACP, as well as what they need from their physicians during the process; 2) explore physicians' views of ACP, including their experiences with initiating ACP and views on ACP training.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study in Nova Scotia, Canada with oncologists, advanced cancer out-patients and their family members. Semi-structured interviews with advanced cancer out-patients and their family members (n = 4 patients, 4 family members) and oncologists (n = 10) were conducted; each participant was recruited separately. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis, which entailed coding, categorizing, and identifying themes recurrent across the datasets.

RESULTS

Themes were identified from the patient / family and oncologist groups, four and five respectively. Themes from patients / families included: 1) positive attitudes towards ACP; 2) healthcare professionals (HCPs) lack an understanding of patients' and families' informational needs during the ACP process; 3) limited access to services and supports; and 4) poor communication between HCPs. Themes from oncologists included: 1) initiation of ACP discussions; 2) navigating patient-family dynamics; 3) limited formal training in ACP; 4) ACP requires a team approach; and 5) lack of coordinated systems hinders ACP.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders believe ACP for advanced cancer patients is important. Patients and families desire earlier and more in-depth discussion of ACP, additional services and supports, and improved communication between their HCPs. In the absence of formal training or guidance, oncologists have used clinical acumen to initiate ACP and a collaborative healthcare team approach.

Advance Care Planning Among Users of a Patient Portal During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Observational Study

Background

Advance care planning is the process of discussing health care treatment preferences based on patients’ personal values, and it often involves the completion of advance directives. In the first months of 2020, a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began circulating widely in the American state of Colorado, leading to widespread diagnosis of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), hospitalizations, and deaths. In this context, the importance of technology-based, non–face-to-face methods to conduct advance care planning via patient portals has increased.

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the rates of use of a web-based advance care planning tool through a health system–based electronic patient portal both before and in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

In 2017, we implemented web-based tools through the patient portal of UCHealth’s electronic health record (EHR) for patients to learn about advance care planning and complete an electronically signed medical durable power of attorney (MDPOA) to legally appoint a medical decision maker. Patients accessing the portal can complete and submit a legally valid MDPOA, which becomes part of their medical record. We collected data on the patients’ date of MDPOA completion, use of advance care planning messaging, age, sex, and geographic location during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (December 29, 2019, to May 30, 2020).

Results

Over a 5-month period that includes the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, total monthly use of the advance care planning portal tool increased from 418 users in January to 1037 users in April and then decreased slightly to 815 users in May. The number of MDPOA forms submitted per week increased 2.4-fold after the stay-at-home order was issued in Colorado on March 26, 2020 (P<.001). The mean age of the advance care planning portal users was 47.7 years (SD 16.1), and 2206/3292 (67.0%) were female. Women were more likely than men to complete an MDPOA, particularly in younger age groups (P<.001). The primary use of the advance care planning portal tools was the completion of an MDPOA (3138/3292, 95.3%), compared to sending an electronic message (148/3292, 4.5%). Over 50% of patients who completed an MDPOA did not have a prior agent in the EHR.

Conclusions

Use of a web-based patient portal to complete an MDPOA increased substantially during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado. There was an increase in advance care planning that corresponded with state government shelter-in-place orders as well as public health reports of increased numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths. Patient portals are an important tool for providing advance care planning resources and documenting medical decision makers during the pandemic to ensure that medical treatment aligns with patient goals and values.

Patient Portal Functionalities and Uptake: Systematic Review Protocol

Background

Patient portals are digital health tools adopted by health care organizations. The portals are generally connected to the electronic health record of the health care organization and offer patients functionalities such as access to the medical record, ability to order repeat prescriptions, make appointments, or message the health care provider. Patient portals may be beneficial for both patients and the health care system. Patient portals can widely differ from one context to another due to the differences in the portal functionalities and capabilities and it is anticipated that outcomes associated with the functionalities also differ. Current systematic reviews report outcomes associated with patient portal uptake but do not explicitly specify the patient portal functionalities.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence on health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult (18 years or older) patients. The review research questions are as follows: What kind of health outcomes do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)? and What kind of health care quality outcomes, including health care utilization outcomes, do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)?

Methods

The systematic review will be conducted by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for relevant literature. The review inclusion criteria will be studies about adult patients (18 years or older), studies only about tethered patient portals, and studies with or without a comparator. We will report patient portal–associated health and health care quality outcomes based on the patient portal functionalities. All quantitative primary study types will be included. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute’s quality assessment tools. Data will be synthesized using narrative synthesis and will be reported according to the patient portal functionalities, country, disease, and health care system model.

Results

Searches will be conducted in September 2019, and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2020.

Conclusions

This systematic review will provide an overview of health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult patients, providing detailed information about the functionalities of the portals and their associations with the outcomes. The review could potentially help patient portal evaluation studies by providing insights into outcomes associated with the different functionalities of patient portals.

Trial Registration

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019141131; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=141131

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/14975

Perceptions of Patient Portal Use for Advance Directive Documentation among Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions

Patient portals can play an innovative role in facilitating advanced care planning (ACP) and documenting advance directives (ADs) among older adults with multiple chronic conditions. The objective of this qualitative sub-study was to (1) understand older adults' use of an ACP patient portal section and (2) obtain user-design input on AD documentation features. Although some older adults may be reluctant, participants reported likely to use a portal for ADs with proper portal design and support.

Considerations for Integrating Advance Care Planning Into the Electronic Health Record: A Primer for Clinicians

Opportunities for expanding advance care planning (ACP) throughout the health-care system make it critical that primary care (PC) providers have a basic understanding of how the electronic health record (EHR) can aid promoting ACP discussions and documentation. This article will offer PC providers 5 useful tips for implementing ACP in outpatient settings utilizing the EHR.

Use of an Ambulatory Patient Portal for Advance Care Planning Engagement

BACKGROUND

Primary care clinics need sustainable, population-based approaches to engage patients in advance care planning (ACP). Patient portal-based ACP tools may provide an option for patient engagement.

OBJECTIVE

To increase ACP outcomes by engaging older adults through portal-based ACP tools, including an electronic Medical Durable Power of Attorney (MDPOA) form.

METHODS

Geriatric clinic pilot of a multi-modal population-based outreach strategy for portal-based ACP tools. Outreach was to patients (n = 105) who were 65 years and older with an active portal account, no cognitive impairment, and no MDPOA on file. Patients received a motivational message via the portal and, if not read within 2 weeks, a mailed postcard about the portal-based ACP tools. Primary outcome was composite of any ACP action at 1-year including 1) new advance directive (AD) in the electronic health record, 2) use of portal-based ACP tools, or 3) documented ACP discussion with a provider.

RESULTS

Sixty-five older adults read the electronic message at 12 months. Seventeen (16%) engaged in at least 1 ACP action. Fourteen of 17 engaged by adding an AD to their record. More patients completed an AD on article or brought a previously completed AD to clinic, compared with choosing to complete an electronic MDPOA via the portal.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief motivational messages about ACP via a patient portal is feasible and may increase ACP outcomes for older adults in primary care. Future studies should evaluate population-based portal outreach strategies in combination with team-based workflows to enhance patient engagement in ACP.

"We're Taking Something So Human and Trying to Digitize": Provider Recommendations for mHealth in Palliative Care

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) is a promising tool for improving health outcomes. However, the benefits of using mHealth in palliative care are under studied. Objective: As a first step to designing meaningful palliative care-specific mobile applications, this research explored provider perspectives regarding the utility of mHealth in palliative care. Design: A qualitative phenomenological study with semistructured interviews. Setting/Subjects: Providers from multiple disciplines working in palliative care settings at an academic medical center. Results: Thematic analysis resulted in five provider recommendations regarding the utility and design of palliative care-specific mHealth, including (i) thoughtfulness to language, context, and delivery when assessing palliative care needs; (ii) include tools for prognosis and advance care planning; (iii) tailor health and quality-of-life goals; (iv) emphasize supports for family and caregivers; and (v) consider technology abilities of older adults. Conclusions: Palliative care providers are enthusiastic about the use of mHealth to improve care coordination, facilitate communication, enhance symptom monitoring, and improve patient-family support. However, providers have reservations about mobile functionality and depersonalized assessment and care. Providers stress the utility of mHealth to facilitate palliative care rather than replace important multidisciplinary services.