Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Jul-Aug;11(4):260-7.
doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1445. Epub 2004 Apr 2.

A content analysis of e-mail communication between patients and their providers: patients get the message

Casey B White  1 , Cheryl A Moyer, David T Stern, Steven J Katz
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

A content analysis of e-mail communication between patients and their providers: patients get the message

Casey B White et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Objective: E-mail use in the clinical setting has been slow to diffuse for several reasons, including providers' concerns about patients' inappropriate and inefficient use of the technology. This study examined the content of a random sample of patient-physician e-mail messages to determine the validity of those concerns.

Design: A qualitative analysis of patient-physician e-mail messages was performed.

Measurements: A total of 3,007 patient-physician e-mail messages were collected over 11 months as part of a randomized, controlled trial of a triage-based e-mail system in two primary care centers (including 98 physicians); 10% of messages were randomly selected for review. Messages were coded across such domains as message type, number of requests per e-mail, inclusion of sensitive content, necessity of a physician response, and message tone.

Results: The majority (82.8%) of messages addressed a single issue. The most common message types included information updates to the physicians (41.4%), prescription renewals (24.2%), health questions (13.2%), questions about test results (10.9%), referrals (8.8%), "other" (including thank yous, apologies) (8.8%), appointments (5.4%), requests for non-health-related information (4.8%), and billing questions (0.3%). Overall, messages were concise, formal, and medically relevant. Very few (5.1%) included sensitive content, and none included urgent messages. Less than half (43.2%) required a physician response.

Conclusion: A triage-based e-mail system promoted e-mail exchanges appropriate for primary care. Most patients adhered to guidelines aimed at focusing content, limiting the number of requests per message, and avoiding urgent requests or highly sensitive content. Thus, physicians' concerns about the content of patients' e-mails may be unwarranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Auto reply sent in response to each incoming message.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
EMAIL (Electronic Messaging, Advice, and Information Link) system flow.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Moyer CA, Stern DT, Katz SJ, Fendrick A. “We got mail”: electronic communication between physicians and patients. Am J Managed Care. 1999;5:1513–22. - PubMed
    1. Moyer CA, Stern DT, Dobias K, Cox DT, Katz SJ. Bridging the electronic divide: patient and provider perspectives on e-mail communication in primary care. Am J Managed Care. 2002;8:427–33. - PubMed
    1. Neill RA, Mainous AG, IIIClark JR, Hagen MD. The utility of electronic mail as a medium for patient–physician communication. Arch Fam Med. 1994;3:268–71. - PubMed
    1. Fridsma D, Ford P, Altman R. A survey of patient access to electronic mail: attitudes, barriers and opportunities. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1994:5–19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nelson R, Stewart P. Use of electronic mail as a clinical tool. J Health Care Inf Manage Syst Soc. 1994;8:33–6. - PubMed

Publication types