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
. 2016;21(1):85-91.
doi: 10.1080/10810730.2015.1033118. Epub 2015 Sep 2.

A Mixed-Methods Study of Patient-Provider E-Mail Content in a Safety-Net Setting

Jacob B Mirsky  1 , Lina Tieu  1 , Courtney Lyles  1 , Urmimala Sarkar  1
Affiliations

A Mixed-Methods Study of Patient-Provider E-Mail Content in a Safety-Net Setting

Jacob B Mirsky et al. J Health Commun. 2016.

Abstract

To explore the content of patient-provider e-mails in a safety-net primary care clinic, we conducted a content analysis using inductive and deductive coding of e-mail exchanges (n = 31) collected from January through November 2013. Participants were English-speaking adult patients with a chronic condition (or their caregivers) cared for at a single publicly funded general internal medicine clinic and their primary care providers (attending general internist physicians, clinical fellows, internal medicine residents, and nurse practitioners). All e-mails were nonurgent. Patients included a medical update in 19% of all e-mails. Patients requested action in 77% of e-mails, and the most common requests overall were for action regarding medications or treatment (29%). Requests for information were less common (45% of e-mails). Patient requests (n = 56) were resolved in 84% of e-mail exchanges, resulting in 63 actions. These results show that patients in safety-net clinics are capable of safely and effectively using electronic messaging for between-visit communication with providers. Safety-net systems should implement electronic communications tools as soon as possible to increase health care access and enhance patients' involvement in their care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Types of requests for action from patients to providers
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Types of requests for information from patients to providers
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Frequency of all requests
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Allen KD, Oddone EZ, Coffman CJ, Datta SK, Juntilla KA, Lindquist JH, … Bosworth HB. Telephone-based self-management of osteoarthritis: A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(9):570–579. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-9-201011020-00006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. America’s Safety Net Hospitals and Health Systems, 2010. Washington, D.C: National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems; 2012.
    1. Anand SG, Feldman MJ, Geller DS, Bisbee A, Bauchner H. A content analysis of e-mail communication between primary care providers and parents. Pediatrics. 2005;115(5):1283–1288. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1297. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bergmo TS, Kummervold PE, Gammon D, Dahl LB. Electronic patient-provider communication: will it offset office visits and telephone consultations in primary care? Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(9):705–710. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.06.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–504. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1006114. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types