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
. 2020 Jul 31;9(7):e14975.
doi: 10.2196/14975.

Patient Portal Functionalities and Uptake: Systematic Review Protocol

Affiliations

Patient Portal Functionalities and Uptake: Systematic Review Protocol

Abrar Alturkistani et al. JMIR Res Protoc. .

Abstract

Background: Patient portals are digital health tools adopted by health care organizations. The portals are generally connected to the electronic health record of the health care organization and offer patients functionalities such as access to the medical record, ability to order repeat prescriptions, make appointments, or message the health care provider. Patient portals may be beneficial for both patients and the health care system. Patient portals can widely differ from one context to another due to the differences in the portal functionalities and capabilities and it is anticipated that outcomes associated with the functionalities also differ. Current systematic reviews report outcomes associated with patient portal uptake but do not explicitly specify the patient portal functionalities.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence on health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult (18 years or older) patients. The review research questions are as follows: What kind of health outcomes do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)? and What kind of health care quality outcomes, including health care utilization outcomes, do tethered patient portals and patient portal functionalities contribute to in adult patients (18 years or older)?

Methods: The systematic review will be conducted by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for relevant literature. The review inclusion criteria will be studies about adult patients (18 years or older), studies only about tethered patient portals, and studies with or without a comparator. We will report patient portal-associated health and health care quality outcomes based on the patient portal functionalities. All quantitative primary study types will be included. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's quality assessment tools. Data will be synthesized using narrative synthesis and will be reported according to the patient portal functionalities, country, disease, and health care system model.

Results: Searches will be conducted in September 2019, and the review is anticipated to be completed by the end of June 2020.

Conclusions: This systematic review will provide an overview of health and health care quality outcomes associated with patient portal use among adult patients, providing detailed information about the functionalities of the portals and their associations with the outcomes. The review could potentially help patient portal evaluation studies by providing insights into outcomes associated with the different functionalities of patient portals.

Trial registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019141131; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=141131.

International registered report identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/14975.

Keywords: electronic health records; online access; patient portal; patient records; personal health record; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Theoretical framework of how patient portal use could lead to improved health and health care quality.

References

    1. Roehrs A, da CCA, Righi RDR, de OKSF. Personal Health Records: A Systematic Literature Review. J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jan 06;19(1):e13. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5876. http://www.jmir.org/2017/1/e13/ v19i1e13 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aljabri D, Dumitrascu A, Burton MC, White L, Khan M, Xirasagar S, Horner R, Naessens J. Patient portal adoption and use by hospitalized cancer patients: a retrospective study of its impact on adverse events, utilization, and patient satisfaction. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 Jul 27;18(1):70. doi: 10.1186/s12911-018-0644-4. https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12911-0... 10.1186/s12911-018-0644-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sadasivaiah S, Lyles CR, Kiyoi S, Wong P, Ratanawongsa N. Disparities in Patient-Reported Interest in Web-Based Patient Portals: Survey at an Urban Academic Safety-Net Hospital. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Mar 26;21(3):e11421. doi: 10.2196/11421. http://www.jmir.org/2019/3/e11421/ v21i3e11421 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rigby M, Georgiou A, Hyppönen H, Ammenwerth E, de KN, Magrabi F, Scott P. Patient Portals as a Means of Information and Communication Technology Support to Patient- Centric Care Coordination - the Missing Evidence and the Challenges of Evaluation. A joint contribution of IMIA WG EVAL and EFMI WG EVAL. Yearb Med Inform. 2015 Aug 13;10(1):148–59. doi: 10.15265/IY-2015-007. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/26123909 me2015-007 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tsai R, Bell EJ, Woo H, Baldwin K, Pfeffer MA. How Patients Use a Patient Portal: An Institutional Case Study of Demographics and Usage Patterns. Appl Clin Inform. 2019 Jan;10(1):96–102. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1677528. http://www.thieme-connect.com/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0038-1677528 - DOI - PMC - PubMed