Cargando…

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

IMPORTANCE: The 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 expl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dambrino, Robert J., Domenico, Henry J., Graves, John A., Buntin, Melinda J. B., Martinez, William, Rosenbloom, S. Trent, Cooper, William O.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10543134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37773508
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3244
_version_ 1785114233580552192
author Dambrino, Robert J.
Domenico, Henry J.
Graves, John A.
Buntin, Melinda J. B.
Martinez, William
Rosenbloom, S. Trent
Cooper, William O.
author_facet Dambrino, Robert J.
Domenico, Henry J.
Graves, John A.
Buntin, Melinda J. B.
Martinez, William
Rosenbloom, S. Trent
Cooper, William O.
author_sort Dambrino, Robert J.
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: The 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. OBJECTIVE: To 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 PARTICIPANTS: This 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. EXPOSURE: Implementation of the IBR on January 20, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The 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 χ(2) test was used to compare proportions of complaints by UPC category between time periods. RESULTS: The 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 (β [SE], 0.03 [0.09]; P =.72). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10543134
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105431342023-10-03 Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule Dambrino, Robert J. Domenico, Henry J. Graves, John A. Buntin, Melinda J. B. Martinez, William Rosenbloom, S. Trent Cooper, William O. JAMA Health Forum Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: The 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. OBJECTIVE: To 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 PARTICIPANTS: This 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. EXPOSURE: Implementation of the IBR on January 20, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The 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 χ(2) test was used to compare proportions of complaints by UPC category between time periods. RESULTS: The 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 (β [SE], 0.03 [0.09]; P =.72). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In 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. American Medical Association 2023-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10543134/ /pubmed/37773508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3244 Text en Copyright 2023 Dambrino RJ IV et al. JAMA Health Forum. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Dambrino, Robert J.
Domenico, Henry J.
Graves, John A.
Buntin, Melinda J. B.
Martinez, William
Rosenbloom, S. Trent
Cooper, William O.
Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title_full Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title_fullStr Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title_full_unstemmed Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title_short Unsolicited Patient Complaints Following the 21st Century Cures Act Information-Blocking Rule
title_sort unsolicited patient complaints following the 21st century cures act information-blocking rule
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10543134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37773508
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3244
work_keys_str_mv AT dambrinorobertj unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT domenicohenryj unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT gravesjohna unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT buntinmelindajb unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT martinezwilliam unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT rosenbloomstrent unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule
AT cooperwilliamo unsolicitedpatientcomplaintsfollowingthe21stcenturycuresactinformationblockingrule