Patients’ Adoption of Electronic Personal Health Records in England: Secondary Data Analysis

Background In England, almost all general practices (GPs) have implemented GP online services such as electronic personal health records (ePHRs) that allow people to schedule appointments, request repeat prescriptions, and access parts of their medical records. The overall adoption rate of GP online services has been low, reaching just 28% in October 2019. In a previous study, Abd-Alrazaq et al adopted a model to assess the factors that influence patients’ use of GP online services in England. According to the previous literature, the predictive power of the Abd-Alrazaq model could be improved by proposing new associations between the existing variables in the model. Objective This study aims to improve the predictive power of the Abd-Alrazaq model by proposing new relationships between the existing variables in the model. Methods The Abd-Alrazaq model was amended by proposing new direct, mediating, moderating, and moderated mediating effects. The amended model was examined using data from a previous study, which were collected by a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 4 GPs in West Yorkshire, England. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the theoretical model and hypotheses. Results The new model accounted for 53% of the variance in performance expectancy (PE), 76% of the variance in behavioral intention (BI), and 49% of the variance in use behavior (UB). In addition to the significant associations found in the previous study, this study found that social influence (SI) and facilitating conditions (FCs) are associated with PE directly and BI indirectly through PE. The association between BI and UB was stronger for younger women with higher levels of education, income, and internet access. The indirect effects of effort expectancy (EE), perceived privacy and security (PPS), and SI on BI were statistically stronger for women without internet access, patients with internet access, and patients without internet access, respectively. The indirect effect of PPS on BI was stronger for patients with college education or diploma than for those with secondary school education and lower, whereas the indirect effect of EE on BI was stronger for patients with secondary school education or lower than for those with college education or a diploma. Conclusions The predictive power of the Abd-Alrazaq model improved by virtue of new significant associations that were not examined before in the context of ePHRs. Further studies are required to validate the new model in different contexts and to improve its predictive power by proposing new variables. The influential factors found in this study should be considered to improve patients’ use of ePHRs.

Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review

Background: Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are defined as electronic applications through which individuals can access, manage, and share health information in a private, secure, and confidential environment. Existing evidence shows their benefits in improving outcomes, especially for chronic disease patients. However, their use has not been as widespread as expected partly due to barriers faced in their adoption and use. We aimed to identify the types of barriers to a patient, provider, and caregiver adoption/use of ePHRs and to analyze their extent in chronic disease care.Methods: A systematic search in Medline, PubMed, Science Direct, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) database was performed to find original studies assessing barriers to ePHR adoption/use in chronic care until the end of 2018. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. We used the PHR adoption model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to analyze the results. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 was used to assess the quality of evidence in the included studies.Results: Sixty publications met our inclusion criteria. Issues found hindering ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care were associated with demographic factors (e.g., patient age and gender) along with key variables related to health status, computer literacy, preferences for direct communication, and patient’s strategy for coping with a chronic condition; as well as factors related to medical practice/environment (e.g., providers’ lack of interest or resistance to adopting ePHRs due to workload, lack of reimbursement, and lack of user training); technological (e.g., concerns over privacy and security, interoperability with electronic health record systems, and lack of customized features for chronic conditions); and chronic disease characteristics (e.g., multiplicities of co-morbid conditions, settings, and providers involved in chronic care).Conclusions: ePHRs can be meaningfully used in chronic disease care if they are implemented as a component of comprehensive care models specifically developed for this care. Our results provide insight into hurdles and barriers mitigating ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care. A deeper understating of the interplay between these barriers will provide opportunities that can lead to an enhanced ePHR adoption/use.

Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review

Background Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are defined as electronic applications through which individuals can access, manage, and share health information in a private, secure, and confidential environment. Existing evidence shows their benefits in improving outcomes, especially for chronic disease patients. However, their use has not been as widespread as expected partly due to barriers faced in their adoption and use. We aimed to identify the types of barriers to a patient, provider, and caregiver adoption/use of ePHRs and to analyze their extent in chronic disease care.Methods A systematic search in Medline, PubMed, Science Direct, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) database was performed to find original studies assessing barriers to ePHR adoption/use in chronic care until the end of 2018. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. We used the PHR adoption model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to analyze the results. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 was used to assess the quality of evidence in the included studies.Results Sixty publications met our inclusion criteria. Issues found hindering ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care were associated with demographic factors (e.g., patient age and gender) along with key variables related to health status, computer literacy, preferences for direct communication, and patient’s strategy for coping with a chronic condition; as well as factors related to medical practice/environment (e.g., providers’ lack of interest or resistance to adopting ePHRs due to workload, lack of reimbursement, and lack of user training); technological (e.g., concerns over privacy and security, interoperability with electronic health record systems, and lack of customized features for chronic conditions); and chronic disease characteristics (e.g., multiplicities of co-morbid conditions, settings, and providers involved in chronic care).Conclusions ePHRs can be meaningfully used in chronic disease care if they are implemented as a component of comprehensive care models specifically developed for this care. Our results provide insight into hurdles and barriers mitigating ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care. A deeper understating of the interplay between these barriers will provide opportunities that can lead to an enhanced ePHR adoption/use.

Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review

Background Electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are defined as electronic applications through which individuals can access, manage and share health information in a private, secure, and confidential environment. Existing evidence shows their benefits in improving outcomes especially for chronic disease patients. However, their use has not been as widespread as expected partly due to barriers faced in their adoption and use. We aimed to identify the types of barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption/use of ePHRs and to analyze their extent in chronic disease care. Methods A systematic search in Medline, PubMed, Science Direct, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) dtabase was performed to find original studies assessing barriers to ePHR adoption/use in chronic care till the end of 2018. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. We used the PHR adoption model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to analyze the results. The MMAT was used to assess the quality of evidence. Results Sixty publications met our inclusion criteria. Issues found hindering ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care were associated with demographic factors (e.g., patient age and gender) along with key variables related to health status, computer literacy, preferences for direct communication, and patient’s strategy for coping with a chronic condition; as well as factors related to medical practice/environment (e.g., providers’ lack of interest or resistance to adopting ePHRs due to workload, lack of reimbursement, and user training); technological (e.g., concerns over privacy and security, interoperability with electronic health record systems, and lack of customized features for chronic conditions); and chronic disease characteristics (e.g., multiplicities of co-morbid conditions, settings and providers involved in chronic care). Conclusions ePHRs can be meaningfully used in chronic disease care if they are implemented as a component of comprehensive care models specifically developed for this care. Our results provide insight into hurdles and barriers mitigating ePHR adoption/use in chronic disease care. Deeper understating of the interplay between these barriers will provide opportunities that can lead to an enhanced ePHR adoption/use.

Barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption and use of electronic personal health records in chronic care: a systematic review

Background Existing evidence shows benefits of electronic personal health records (PHRs) in improving outcomes for chronic disease patients. However, its use has not been as widespread as expected. We aimed to review barriers to patient, provider, and caregiver adoption/use of PHRs in chronic disease care. Methods A systematic search in Medline, PubMed, Science Direct, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) dtabase was performed to find original studies assessing barriers to PHR adoption/use in chronic care till the end of 2018. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. We used the PHR adoption model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to analyze the results. The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 was used to assess the quality of evidence in included studies. Results Sixty publications met our inclusion criteria. Issues found hindering PHR adoption/use in chronic disease care were associated with demographic factors (e.g., patient age and gender) along with key variables related to health status, computer literacy, preferences for direct communication, and patient’s strategy for coping with a chronic condition; as well as factors related to medical practice/environment (e.g., providers’ lack of interest or resistance to adopting PHRs due to workload, lack of reimbursement, and lack of user training); technological (e.g., concerns over privacy and security, interoperability with electronic health record systems, and lack of customized features for chronic conditions); and chronic disease characteristics (e.g., multiplicities of co-morbid conditions, settings and providers involved in chronic care). Conclusions PHRs can be meaningfully used in chronic disease care if they are implemented as a component of comprehensive care models specifically developed for this care. Our results provide insight into hurdles and barriers mitigating PHR adoption/use in chronic disease care. Deeper understating of the interplay between these barriers will provide opportunities that can lead to an enhanced PHR adoption/use in chronic disease care.