Expectations and experiences of eHealth in primary care: A qualitative practice-based investigation
Introduction
Public access to eHealth applications is growing but eHealth services will not be used unless both patients’ and clinicians’ expectations and experiences are taken into account during their design and adoption [1], [2]. Recent IT developments in the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK have largely been aimed at improving information for clinicians and administrative staff. The next step in eHealth is to develop applications and services for use by patients. While evidence shows that health can be improved by engaging patients in eHealth initiatives [3], [4], other studies suggest that success is by no means guaranteed [5]. eHealth services represent a significant shift in culture and practice from the traditional model [6], and patients may be required to move from being primarily passive recipients of information and services to a more active role where they are expected to exercise more initiative.
There have been very few studies of patient experiences of non-clinical eHealth services. In the UK, a survey [7] was undertaken of patients’ perception of choice when using Choose and Book, which allows secondary care (hospital and specialist clinic) outpatient appointments to be booked by GPs in consultation with patients. However, this service is not patient-initiated as its use is always mediated by someone else (usually the GP). In the US, web-based services have been surveyed [8], [9] that allow patients to book appointments and order repeat prescriptions amongst other features. High patient satisfaction was found [8] and users were generally younger, white, more affluent and healthier than the average patient [9]. Prescription requests were used slightly more frequently than appointment booking, but neither service was used as often as others such as viewing lab results or emailing clinicians.
Patient opinions concerning future eHealth services have been sought in a number of studies. In studies based on existing eHealth services, the utility of using grounded theory to ascertain patient views on electronic medical records systems has been highlighted [10], while Ross et al. [11] concluded that while a majority of patients are interested in using Internet-accessible records a substantial minority are not. Andreassen et al. [12] found that patient use of eHealth services was to supplement other services rather than to replace them. In scenario-based studies in the UK, it was found [13] that patients (and GPs) broadly welcomed future services, Greenhalgh et al. [14] estimated that health literacy influenced patient attitudes towards future use of both their Electronic Health Record (EHR) and Personal Health Record (PHR), while it was found [15] that patients were interested in future use of PHRs and email and also wanted more information on clinicians, particularly surgeons. For clinician views, a survey of NHS primary healthcare professionals’ views on future eHealth services [16] found that they recognized general benefits; however some physicians have expressed concerns that shared medical records may increase workload or disrupt the doctor–patient relationship [11], [17].
In this study we investigate the experiences of patients using an eHealth service in three primary care general practices in the UK, discussing factors influencing use as well as non-use; we also study staff expectations and experiences [1]. Additionally we explore patient and GP attitudes to a range of future, primary care-oriented eHealth features planned as extensions to the service. Much research into patient use of eHealth services, for example on electronic access to medical records [18], [19], [20] and support for patients with conditions such as diabetes or chronic heart disease [21], [22], has been conducted under experimental or trial, rather than naturalistic, conditions. In contrast, our research investigates an eHealth service in everyday settings.
Section snippets
Context
Our research was conducted at three different general practices that were introducing a new eHealth service (Access, from the UK IT provider EMIS) between 2002 and 2004. North 1 was a city centre practice with a patient population of 16,000, with two-thirds of its patients being students. North 2 was in a town with a patient population of 3500, almost half of whom were elderly, and in an area rated as deprived in terms of government investment, while London was a suburban practice where the
Patient use of Access
At all three practices, usage log files indicated that the number of appointments made during the study, shown in Table 2, was low. The London practice, after 6 months, achieved much greater use than the other two practices had after almost 2 years. Our measure of usage, constructed from the percentage of appointments made using Access as a ratio of the average number of appointments patients normally make [29], highlights the differences between the three practices as it takes into account the
Mixed patient perceptions of Access
There was a big gap between expressed intention to use Access and actual usage, which was low. The extent of the gap depends upon the context of intended technology use [30], [22], and our interpretation was that “intention to use” meant intention to use for every appointment.
A functionally similar service is Choose and Book, a central part of the NHS £12.7 billion National Programme for IT (NPfIT). This service has been fully implemented in the NHS since 2006, and allows secondary care
Limitations
A feature of this study was that it evaluated the use of Access by patients in a naturalistic, as opposed to experimental environment, where patients and staff integrated Access with their everyday health-related behaviour. In this type of investigative research the researcher is part of the social world being studied and may therefore introduce bias. We attempted to minimise this by open questioning and discussion of emerging results with fellow researchers. The study was limited to three
EMIS Access
Access has undergone considerable development and expansion since the study was completed. The features of Access now include appointment booking, prescription management, secure messaging, demographic updates, pre-registration and medical record viewing. It is now (figures for December 2008) used by at least 1650 practices in the UK, and 189,973 individuals logged in to the service during the course of the month.
The most popular feature with patients, based on usage, is prescription
Acknowledgements
Access to the three research sites, to the web-based survey and to usage figures was facilitated by Rob Murgatroyd at EMIS. Thanks to him, the staff and patients of the three participating practices. Financial assistance is gratefully acknowledged from the Mersey Primary Care R&D Consortium and the Barnsley Primary Care Trust.
Contributors: DF, MG and HM planned and designed the study; HM carried out the data collection with assistance from DF; HM, DF, MG and PG carried out data analysis; DF and
References (112)
- et al.
Look at your health: outcomes associated with a computer-assisted smoking cessation counseling intervention for community college students
Addict. Behav.
(2008) - et al.
Patient experiences and attitudes about access to a patient electronic health care record and linked web messaging
J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc.
(2004) - et al.
Who uses the patient Internet portal? The PatientSite experience
J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc.
(2006) - et al.
Patient-perceived usefulness of online electronic medical records: employing grounded theory in the development of information and communication technologies for use by patients living with chronic illness
J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc.
(2005) - et al.
Doctor–patient relationship as motivation and outcome: examining uses of an interactive cancer communication system
Int. J. Med. Inf.
(2007) The theory of planned behavior
Org. Behav. Human Decis. Process.
(1991)- et al.
Meeting patients’ needs with patient information systems: potential benefits of qualitative research methods
Int. J. Med. Inf.
(2001) Health information systems: failure, success and improvisation
Int. J. Med. Inf.
(2006)- et al.
Characteristics of online and offline health information seekers and factors that discriminate between them
Soc. Sci. Med.
(2004) - et al.
A research agenda for personal health records (PHRs)
J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc.
(2008)
Untangling the web – the impact of Internet use on health care and the physician–patient relationship
Patient Educ. Counsel.
Evaluation of a community health promotion resource for primary care practices
Am. J. Prev. Med.
Information technology and organizational learning: a review and assessment of research.
Account. Manag. Inf. Technol.
Having expectations of information systems benefits that match received benefits: does it really matter?
Inf. Manag.
Design and evaluation in eHealth: challenges and implications for an interdisciplinary field
J. Med. Internet Res.
Evaluation of ehealth systems and services
Br. Med. J.
A systematic review of interactive computer-assisted technology in diabetes care
J. Gen. Intern. Med.
New technologies for chronic disease management and control: a systematic review
J. Telemed. Telecare
eHealth and the future: promise or peril?
Br. Med. J.
Does Choose & Book fail to deliver the expected choice to patients? A survey of patients’ experience of outpatient appointment booking
BMC Med. Inf. Decis. Making
Expectations of patients and physicians regarding patient-accessible medical records
J. Med. Internet Res.
European citizens’ use of e-health services: a study of seven countries
BMC Public Health
Patient and health care professional views and experiences of computer agent-supported health care
Inf. Prim. Care
Patients’ attitudes to the summary care record and HealthSpace: qualitative study
Br. Med. J.
Engaging Patients in their Healthcare—How is the UK doing Relative to other Countries?
Remote working: survey of attitudes to eHealth of doctors and nurses in rural general practices in the United Kingdom
Fam. Pract.
Why facilitate patient access to medical records?
Stud. Health Technol. Inf.
Potential of electronic personal health records
Br. Med. J.
A systematic review of computer-based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach?
Int. J. Qual. Health Care
Internet-based chronic disease self-management: a randomized trial
Med. Care
Web-based care management in patients with poorly controlled diabetes
Diab. Care
Designing Social Research
Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches
Research in Information Systems: A Handbook For Research Supervisors and their Students
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Social Work Research and Evaluation: Foundations of Evidence-Based Practice
Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process
Br. Med. J.
Living in Britain
The intention–behaviour gap—it's all under control (executive control)
Eur. Health Psychol.
Moderators of the intention–behaviour and perceived behavioural control–behaviour relationships for leisure-time physical activity
Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act.
Web-based tailored lifestyle programs: exploration of the target group's interests and implications for practice
Health Promot. Pract.
Bridging the intention–behaviour gap: planning, self-efficacy, and action control in the adoption and maintenance of physical exercise
Psychol. Health
Barriers and motivators to gaining access to smoking cessation services amongst deprived smokers—a qualitative study
BMC Health Serv. Res.
Deprivation, demography, and the distribution of general practice: challenging the conventional wisdom of inverse care
Br. J. Gen. Pract.
Exercise prescribing: computer application in older adults
Gerontologist
Preferences for access to the GP: a discrete choice experiment
Br. J. Gen. Pract.
Cited by (62)
Health professionals’ expectations of a national patient portal for self-management
2018, International Journal of Medical InformaticsCitation Excerpt :For example, in Flynn and colleagues’ [27] qualitative case study, many professionals had not heard about the new service to be implemented, and clinical and practice manager staff felt that they were only partially informed about its objectives. Several studies have shown that if professionals do not know about the new innovation and its benefits, adoption and implementation will not take place [28]. Thus, informing professionals and communicating the benefits of the new patient portal is an important first step in implementation; therefore, we hypothesized the following:
Patients’ Experiences of a National Patient Portal and Its Usability: Cross-Sectional Survey Study
2023, Journal of Medical Internet ResearchE-Health Service Model for Asian Developing Countries: A Case of Emergency Medical Service for Elderly People in Thailand
2022, Research Anthology on Supporting Healthy Aging in a Digital Society