Caregivers' role in using a personal electronic health record: a qualitative study of cancer patients and caregivers in Germany

Background Particularly in the context of severe diseases like cancer, many patients wish to include caregivers in the planning of treatment and care. Many caregivers like to be involved but feel insufficiently enabled. This study aimed at providing insight into patients’ and caregivers’ perspectives on caregivers’ roles in managing the patient portal of an electronic personal health record (PHR). Methods A descriptive qualitative study was conducted comprising two study phases: (1) Usability tests and interviews with patients with cancer and caregivers (2) additional patient interviews after a 3-month-pilot-testing of the PHR. For both study parts, a convenience sample was selected, focusing on current state of health and therapy process and basic willingness to participate and ending up with a mixed sample as well as saturation of data. All interviews were audio-recorded, pseudonymized, transcribed verbatim and qualitatively analyzed. Results Two main categories emerged from qualitative data: ‘Caregivers’ role’ and ‘Graduation of access rights’ – consisting of four subcategories each. The interviewed patients ( n  = 22) and caregivers ( n  = 9) felt that the involvement of caregivers is central to foster the acceptance of a PHR for cancer patients. However, their role varied from providing technical support to representing patients, e.g. if the patient’s state of health made this necessary. Heterogeneous opinions emerged regarding the question whether caregivers should receive full or graduated access on a patient’s PHR. Conclusions In order to support the patient and to participate in the care process, caregivers need up-to-date information on the patient’s health and treatment. Nevertheless, some patients do not want to share all medical data with caregivers, which might strain the patient-caregiver relationship. This needs to be considered in development and implementation of personal health records. Generally, in the debate on patient portals of a personal health record, paying attention to the role of caregivers is essential. By appreciating the important relationship between patients and caregivers right from the beginning, implementation, of a PHR would be enhanced. Trial registration ISRCTN85224823 . Date of registration: 23/12/2015 (retrospectively registered).

[1]  Trudy van der Weijden,et al.  Developing a patient portal for haematology patients requires involvement of all stakeholders and a customised design, tailored to the individual needs , 2019, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[2]  Neil M. Paige,et al.  Electronic Patient Portals: Evidence on Health Outcomes, Satisfaction, Efficiency, and Attitudes , 2013, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[3]  A. Untas,et al.  Treatment decision-making in chronic diseases: What are the family members' roles, needs and attitudes? A systematic review. , 2017, Patient education and counseling.

[4]  Lorenz Uhlmann,et al.  A Personal Electronic Health Record: Study Protocol of a Feasibility Study on Implementation in a Real-World Health Care Setting , 2017, JMIR research protocols.

[5]  Tara Matthews,et al.  "She'll just grab any device that's closer": A Study of Everyday Device & Account Sharing in Households , 2016, CHI.

[6]  D. Ose,et al.  [Personal health records on the Internet. A narrative review of attitudes, expectations, utilization and effects on health outcomes]. , 2017, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[7]  Klaus Meyer-Wegener,et al.  Das Internet als Informationsquelle für pflegende Angehörige eines Demenzpatienten , 2009 .

[8]  Celine Latulipe,et al.  Insights Into Older Adult Patient Concerns Around the Caregiver Proxy Portal Use: Qualitative Interview Study , 2018, Journal of medical Internet research.

[9]  Henriette Cramer,et al.  Caring About Sharing: Couples' Practices in Single User Device Access , 2016, GROUP.

[10]  Antje Brandner,et al.  Strengthening Interprofessional Requirements Engineering Through Action Sheets: A Pilot Study , 2016, JMIR human factors.

[11]  E. Hoster,et al.  The role of relatives in decisions concerning life-prolonging treatment in patients with end-stage malignant disorders: informants, advocates or surrogate decision-makers? , 2011, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[12]  P. Sainsbury,et al.  Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. , 2007, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[13]  G. Andersson,et al.  Multimedia Appendix 1 , 2011 .

[14]  D. Roter,et al.  Attitudes Toward Family Involvement in Cancer Treatment Decision Making: The Perspectives of Patients, Family Caregivers, and Their Oncologists , 2017, Psycho-oncology.

[15]  Lujo Bauer,et al.  Access Control for Home Data Sharing: Attitudes, Needs and Practices , 2010, CHI.

[16]  Alastair McLellan,et al.  Caring about sharing. , 2013, The Health service journal.

[17]  Jessica S. Ancker,et al.  Should parents see their teen’s medical record? Asking about the effect on adolescent–doctor communication changes attitudes , 2018, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[18]  J. Kelly,et al.  Public attitudes about health information technology, and its relationship to health care quality, costs, and privacy. , 2011, Health services research.

[19]  M. Groenvold,et al.  Cancer caregiving tasks and consequences and their associations with caregiver status and the caregiver’s relationship to the patient: a survey , 2014, BMC Cancer.

[20]  D. Ose,et al.  Collaboration and communication in colorectal cancer care: a qualitative study of the challenges experienced by patients and health care professionals , 2015, Family practice.

[21]  Björn Bergh,et al.  The Patient Portal of the Personal Cross-Enterprise Electronic Health Record (PEHR) in the Rhine-Neckar-Region , 2016, MIE.

[22]  M. Hadi,et al.  Ensuring rigour and trustworthiness of qualitative research in clinical pharmacy , 2015, International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy.

[23]  W. Chou,et al.  Caring for caregivers and patients: Research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving , 2016, Cancer.

[24]  Hilde van der Togt,et al.  Publisher's Note , 2003, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[25]  Oliver Heinze,et al.  The patients’ active role in managing a personal electronic health record: a qualitative analysis , 2015, Supportive Care in Cancer.

[26]  Charles Safran,et al.  Information sharing across generations and environments (InfoSAGE): study design and methodology protocol , 2018, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[27]  D. Ose,et al.  Utilizing a Prototype Patient-Controlled Electronic Health Record in Germany: Qualitative Analysis of User-Reported Perceptions and Perspectives , 2018, JMIR formative research.

[28]  S. Whittaker,et al.  ‘We're all carrying a burden that we're not sharing’: a qualitative study of the impact of cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma on the family , 2015, The British journal of dermatology.

[29]  W. Hiddemann,et al.  The second patient? Family members of cancer patients and their role in end-of-life decision making , 2018, BMC Palliative Care.

[30]  Susan S Woods,et al.  Patient Interest in Sharing Personal Health Record Information , 2011, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[31]  Hoda Badr,et al.  New frontiers in couple-based interventions in cancer care: refining the prescription for spousal communication , 2017, Acta oncologica.

[32]  Joachim Pfister,et al.  "This will cause a lot of work.": Coping with Transferring Files and Passwords as Part of a Personal Digital Legacy , 2017, CSCW.

[33]  L. Squiers,et al.  Implementing and evaluating shared decision making in oncology practice , 2014, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[34]  Janice L. Krieger,et al.  Distributed Cognition in Cancer Treatment Decision Making: An Application of the DECIDE Decision-Making Styles Typology , 2017, Qualitative health research.

[35]  M. Bakitas,et al.  How family caregivers of persons with advanced cancer assist with upstream healthcare decision-making: A qualitative study , 2019, PloS one.

[36]  C. Michaud,et al.  Needs-focused interventions for family caregivers of older adults with cancer: a descriptive interpretive study , 2018, Supportive Care in Cancer.

[37]  Digitalizing Health Services by Implementing a Personal Electronic Health Record in Germany: Qualitative Analysis of Fundamental Prerequisites From the Perspective of Selected Experts , 2020, Journal of medical Internet research.

[38]  W. Breitbart,et al.  Care for the cancer caregiver: A systematic review , 2012, Palliative and Supportive Care.

[39]  Jamie A. Stone,et al.  Medication management activities performed by informal caregivers of older adults , 2017, Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP.

[40]  G. Demiris,et al.  A multimethod analysis of shared decision-making in hospice interdisciplinary team meetings including family caregivers , 2016, Palliative medicine.

[41]  Andrew K. Shenton Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects , 2004, Educ. Inf..