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
. 2017 Oct 27;19(10):e366.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.7987.

Web-Based Tools for Text-Based Patient-Provider Communication in Chronic Conditions: Scoping Review

Teja Voruganti  1 , Eva Grunfeld  1   2   3   4 , Tutsirai Makuwaza  2 , Jacqueline L Bender  3   5
Affiliations

Web-Based Tools for Text-Based Patient-Provider Communication in Chronic Conditions: Scoping Review

Teja Voruganti et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Patients with chronic conditions require ongoing care which not only necessitates support from health care providers outside appointments but also self-management. Web-based tools for text-based patient-provider communication, such as secure messaging, allow for sharing of contextual information and personal narrative in a simple accessible medium, empowering patients and enabling their providers to address emerging care needs.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to (1) conduct a systematic search of the published literature and the Internet for Web-based tools for text-based communication between patients and providers; (2) map tool characteristics, their intended use, contexts in which they were used, and by whom; (3) describe the nature of their evaluation; and (4) understand the terminology used to describe the tools.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) and EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database) databases. We summarized information on the characteristics of the tools (structure, functions, and communication paradigm), intended use, context and users, evaluation (study design and outcomes), and terminology. We performed a parallel search of the Internet to compare with tools identified in the published literature.

Results: We identified 54 papers describing 47 unique tools from 13 countries studied in the context of 68 chronic health conditions. The majority of tools (77%, 36/47) had functions in addition to communication (eg, viewable care plan, symptom diary, or tracker). Eight tools (17%, 8/47) were described as allowing patients to communicate with the team or multiple health care providers. Most of the tools were intended to support communication regarding symptom reporting (49%, 23/47), and lifestyle or behavior modification (36%, 17/47). The type of health care providers who used tools to communicate with patients were predominantly allied health professionals of various disciplines (30%, 14/47), nurses (23%, 11/47), and physicians (19%, 9/47), among others. Over half (52%, 25/48) of the tools were evaluated in randomized controlled trials, and 23 tools (48%, 23/48) were evaluated in nonrandomized studies. Terminology of tools varied by intervention type and functionality and did not consistently reflect a theme of communication. The majority of tools found in the Internet search were patient portals from 6 developers; none were found among published articles.

Conclusions: Web-based tools for text-based patient-provider communication were identified from a wide variety of clinical contexts and with varied functionality. Tools were most prevalent in contexts where intended use was self-management. Few tools for team-based communication were found, but this may become increasingly important as chronic disease care becomes more interdisciplinary.

Keywords: Internet; chronic diseases; communication; electronic mail; interdisciplinary communication; patient care team; patient portal; physician-patient relations; telemedicine and telecommunication; text messaging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram for published literature search.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow diagram for Internet-based search.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Published articles by year (n=54).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ward BW, Schiller JS, Goodman RA. Multiple chronic conditions among US adults: a 2012 update. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014 Apr 17;11:E62. doi: 10.5888/pcd11.130389. https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2014/13_0389.htm - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wagner EH, Groves T. Care for chronic diseases. Br Med J. 2002 Oct 26;325(7370):913–4. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/12399321 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Glasgow RE, Funnell MM, Bonomi AE, Davis C, Beckham V, Wagner EH. Self-management aspects of the improving chronic illness care breakthrough series: implementation with diabetes and heart failure teams. Ann Behav Med. 2002;24(2):80–7. - PubMed
    1. Wagner EH. The role of patient care teams in chronic disease management. Br Med J. 2000 Feb 26;320(7234):569–72. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/10688568 - PMC - PubMed
    1. O'Malley AS, Cunningham PJ. Patient experiences with coordination of care: the benefit of continuity and primary care physician as referral source. J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Feb;24(2):170–7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0885-5. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/19096897 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding