Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule

被引:2
|
作者
Dambrino, Robert J. [1 ,2 ,10 ]
Domenico, Henry J. [3 ,4 ]
Graves, John A. [2 ]
Buntin, Melinda J. B. [2 ,5 ,6 ]
Martinez, William [7 ]
Rosenbloom, S. Trent [7 ,8 ,9 ]
Cooper, William O. [2 ,4 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Neurol Surg, Nashville, TN USA
[2] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Hlth Policy, Nashville, TN USA
[3] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Biostat, Nashville, TN USA
[4] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Ctr Patient & Profess Advocacy, Nashville, TN USA
[5] Johns Hopkins Univ, Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD USA
[6] Johns Hopkins Univ, Carey Business Sch, Baltimore, MD USA
[7] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med, Nashville, TN USA
[8] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Pediat, Nashville, TN USA
[9] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Biomed Informat, Nashville, TN USA
[10] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Neurol Surg, Med Ctr, Med Ctr North T4224, Nashville, TN 37212 USA
来源
JAMA HEALTH FORUM | 2023年 / 4卷 / 09期
关键词
INVITING PATIENTS; DOCTORS NOTES; ACCESS; RISK; READ;
D O I
10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3244
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
ImportanceThe 21st Century Cures Act includes an information-blocking rule (IBR) that requires health systems to provide patients with immediate access to their health information in the electronic medical record upon request. Patients accessing their health information before they receive an explanation from their health care team may experience confusion and may be more likely to share unsolicited patient complaints (UPCs) with their health care organization.ObjectiveTo evaluate the quantity of UPCs about physicians before and after IBR implementation and to identify themes in UPCs that may identify patient confusion, fear, or anger related to the release of information.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted with an interrupted time-series analysis of UPCs spanning January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. The data were obtained from a single academic medical center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, at which the IBR was implemented on January 20, 2021. Data analysis was performed from January 11 to July 15, 2023.ExposureImplementation of the IBR on January 20, 2021.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the monthly rate of UPCs before and after IBR implementation. A qualitative analysis was performed for UPCs received after IBR implementation. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare monthly complaints between the pre- and post-IBR groups. The Pearson chi 2 test was used to compare proportions of complaints by UPC category between time periods.ResultsThe medical center received 8495 UPCs during the study period: 3022 over 12 months before and 5473 over 18 months after institutional IBR implementation. There was no difference in the monthly proportions of UPCs per 1000 patient encounters before (median, 0.81 [IQR, 0.75-0.88]) and after (median, 0.83 [IQR, 0.77-0.89]) IBR implementation (difference in medians, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.07]; P =.86). Segmented regression analysis revealed no difference in monthly UPCs (beta [SE], 0.03 [0.09]; P =.72).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, implementation of the Cures Act IBR was not associated with an increase in monthly rates of UPCs. These findings suggest that review of UPCs identified as IBR-specific complaints may allow clinicians and organizations to prepare patients that their test and procedure results may be available before clinicians are able to review them and respond.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Beyond the AJR: Study Finds No Increase in Patient Complaints After Implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
    Vincoff, Nina S.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2024, 223 (02)
  • [2] 21st Century Cures Act: Patient-Facing Implications of Information Blocking
    Mehan, William A., Jr.
    Brink, James A.
    Hirsch, Joshua A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 18 (07) : 1012 - 1016
  • [3] Health Information Blocking: Responses Under the 21st Century Cures Act
    Black, Jennifer R.
    Hulkower, Rachel L.
    Ramanathan, Tara
    [J]. PUBLIC HEALTH REPORTS, 2018, 133 (05) : 610 - 613
  • [4] Patient Access of Their Radiology Reports Before and After Implementation of 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Provisions at a Large Multicampus Health System
    Pollock, Jordan R.
    Petty, Skye A. Buckner
    Schmitz, John J.
    Varner, Jacob
    Metcalfe, Allie M.
    Tan, Nelly
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2024, 222 (06)
  • [5] Challenges Meeting 21st Century Cures Act Patient Identity Interoperability and Information Blocking Rules
    Gellert, George A.
    Erwich, Mark E.
    Herdman, Sara Krivicky
    [J]. JOURNAL FOR HEALTHCARE QUALITY, 2024, 46 (05) : 306 - 315
  • [6] Information Blocking and Oncology Implications of the 21st Century Cures Act and Open Notes
    Waseem, Najeff
    Kircher, Sheetal
    Feliciano, Josephine L.
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2021, 7 (11) : 1609 - 1610
  • [7] The 21st Century Cures Act Information Blocking Rule in Post-Acute Long-Term Care
    Huang, Sean S.
    Stenner, Shane P.
    Rosenbloom, S. Trent
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION, 2024, 25 (01) : 58 - 60
  • [8] The 21st Century Cures Act
    Kakkis, Emil
    Bronstein, Max G.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2015, 373 (17): : 1678 - 1678
  • [9] Information Blocking and Oncology Implications of the 21st Century Cures Act and Open Notes COMMENT & RESPONSE
    Hall, Peter S.
    Cairns, David A.
    Seymour, Matthew T.
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2021, 7 (11) : 1725 - 1725
  • [10] Preface: The 21st Century Cures Act-A Cure for the 21st Century?
    Okoro, Andrea-Gale O.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LAW & MEDICINE, 2018, 44 (2-3) : 155 - 155