Meaningful use in the safety net: a rapid ethnography of patient portal implementation at five community health centers in California

Objective US health care institutions are implementing secure websites (patient portals) to achieve federal Meaningful Use (MU) certification. We sought to understand efforts to implement portals in "safety net" health care systems that provide services for low-income populations. Materials and Methods Our rapid ethnography involved visits at 4 California safety net health systems and in-depth interviews at a fifth. Visits included interviews with clinicians and executives ( n  = 12), informal focus groups with front-line staff ( n  = 35), observations of patient portal sign-up procedures and clinic work, review of marketing materials and portal use data, and a brief survey ( n  = 45). Results Our findings demonstrate that the health systems devoted considerable effort to enlisting staff support for portal adoption and integrating portal-related work into clinic routines. Although all health systems had achieved, or were close to achieving, MU benchmarks, patients faced numerous barriers to portal use and our participants were uncertain how to achieve and sustain "meaningful use" as defined by and for their patients. Discussion Health systems' efforts to achieve MU certification united clinic staff under a shared ethos of improved quality of care. However, MU's assumptions about patients' demand for electronic access to health information and ability to make use of it directed clinics' attention to enrollment and message routing rather than to the relevance and usability of a tool that is minimally adaptable to the safety net context. Conclusion We found a mismatch between MU-based metrics of patient engagement and the priorities and needs of safety net patient populations.

[1]  R. Gold,et al.  Ethnographic process evaluation in primary care: explaining the complexity of implementation , 2014, BMC Health Services Research.

[2]  R. Wears,et al.  Computer technology and clinical work: still waiting for Godot. , 2005, JAMA.

[3]  Ralph Gonzales,et al.  Using Rapid Ethnography to Support the Design and Implementation of Health Information Technologies. , 2015, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[4]  Sara J. Czaja,et al.  The Usability of Electronic Personal Health Record Systems for an Underserved Adult Population , 2015, Hum. Factors.

[5]  Urmimala Sarkar,et al.  Barriers and Facilitators to Online Portal Use Among Patients and Caregivers in a Safety Net Health Care System: A Qualitative Study , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[6]  Marc Berg,et al.  Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges , 2001, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[7]  F. Mair,et al.  Why is it difficult to implement e-health initiatives? A qualitative study , 2011, Implementation science : IS.

[8]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  Ethnographic study of ICT-supported collaborative work routines in general practice , 2010, BMC health services research.

[9]  R. Hasnain-Wynia,et al.  Disparities in Enrollment and Use of an Electronic Patient Portal , 2011, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[10]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[11]  Terese Otte-Trojel,et al.  Characteristics of Patient Portals Developed in the Context of Health Information Exchanges: Early Policy Effects of Incentives in the Meaningful Use Program in the United States , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.

[12]  Courtney R. Lyles,et al.  Online patient websites for electronic health record access among vulnerable populations: portals to nowhere? , 2017, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[13]  D. Swinglehurst,et al.  Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. , 2009, The Milbank quarterly.

[14]  D E Forsythe,et al.  New bottles, old wine: hidden cultural assumptions in a computerized explanation system for migraine sufferers. , 1996, Medical anthropology quarterly.

[15]  D. Bates,et al.  The digital divide in adoption and use of a personal health record. , 2011, Archives of internal medicine.

[16]  Madeleine Akrich,et al.  The De-scription of Technical Objects , 1992 .

[17]  Susan S. Woods,et al.  Promise of and potential for patient-facing technologies to enable meaningful use. , 2011, American journal of preventive medicine.

[18]  Marc Berg,et al.  Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[19]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Why Do Evaluations of eHealth Programs Fail? An Alternative Set of Guiding Principles , 2010, PLoS medicine.

[20]  H. Boeije A Purposeful Approach to the Constant Comparative Method in the Analysis of Qualitative Interviews , 2002 .

[21]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  Studying technology use as social practice: the untapped potential of ethnography , 2011, BMC medicine.

[22]  Elske Ammenwerth,et al.  The Impact of Electronic Patient Portals on Patient Care: A Systematic Review of Controlled Trials , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[23]  Ralph Gonzales,et al.  Benefit or burden? A sociotechnical analysis of diagnostic computer kiosks in four California hospital emergency departments. , 2012, Social science & medicine.

[24]  A. Sheikh,et al.  Undertaking sociotechnical evaluations of health information technologies. , 2014, Informatics in primary care.