Electronic Medical Record–Based Electronic Messaging Among Patients with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background Electronic medical record (EMR) systems and electronic messages are an increasingly common conduit between physicians and patients. Clear benefits of this type of communication have been established, especially among cancer patients. Studies suggest that patient portals and electronic messaging platforms can help with care coordination between oncology providers and facilitate asynchronous patient-provider communication. Despite the many benefits, there is little research regarding EMR and secure messaging use, particularly among patients with breast cancer.

Objectives The objective of this systematic review was to examine the evidence supporting the use of EMR-based messaging systems in patients with breast cancer.

Methods A systematic literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science CINAHL, and Cochrane Library was conducted. Studies were required to be published between 2005 and 2022 and report data on demographic information and electronic messaging between patients and providers. Studies were excluded if they reported insufficient data, did not include breast cancer patients, or were not published in English.

Results This study identified 10 articles that met inclusion criteria. The resulting studies investigated topics such as: patterns of messaging and medication adherence, cancer screening, messaging as a predictor of behavior or outcomes, and symptom management. The literature indicates that electronic messaging with providers was associated with clinical benefits for breast cancer patients and improved screening behaviors.

Conclusion This review uncovered multiple areas to focus future research on, including ideal volume of electronic messages sent and their relation to prescription adherence, studies focusing solely on the breast cancer population, racial disparities in electronic messaging, and provider perceptions of electronic messaging. It is vital that more work be done to understand barriers and gaps in EMR usage to ensure that all individuals can access this increasingly essential medical service while minimizing physician workload and burnout.

Keywords

breast cancer - electronic health records and systems - patient-provider communications - patient-reported outcomes - health care disparities

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

No human subjects were involved in this research.

Publication History

Received: 09 October 2022

Accepted: 27 December 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
29 December 2022

Article published online:
15 February 2023

• References

• 1 Evans RS. Electronic health records: then, now, and in the future. Yearb Med Inform 2016; (suppl 1) S48-S61
• 2 Burde H. Health Law the HITECH Act-an overview. Virtual Mentor 2011; 13 (03) 172-175
• 3 Wald JS, Middleton B, Bloom A. et al. A patient-controlled journal for an electronic medical record: issues and challenges. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004; 107 (Pt 2): 1166-1170
• 4 Alkureishi MA, Lee WW, Lyons M. et al. Impact of electronic medical record use on the patient-doctor relationship and communication: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31 (05) 548-560
• 5 Kruse CS, Bolton K, Freriks G. The effect of patient portals on quality outcomes and its implications to meaningful use: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2015; 17 (02) e44
• 6 Woods SS, Schwartz E, Tuepker A. et al. Patient experiences with full electronic access to health records and clinical notes through the My HealtheVet Personal Health Record Pilot: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (03) e65
• 7 Feinberg J, Shaw S, Kashyap N. et al. Evaluating the impact of a new smartphone texting tool on patient care in obstetrics, an emergent healthcare setting. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (05) 879-887
• 8 Hess R, Bryce CL, Paone S. et al. Exploring challenges and potentials of personal health records in diabetes self-management: implementation and initial assessment. Telemed J E Health 2007; 13 (05) 509-517
• 9 Kaelber D, Pan EC. The value of personal health record (PHR) systems. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008; 2008: 343-347
• 10 Cronin RM, Davis SE, Shenson JA, Chen Q, Rosenbloom ST, Jackson GP. Growth of secure messaging through a patient portal as a form of outpatient interaction across clinical specialties. Appl Clin Inform 2015; 6 (02) 288-304
• 11 Osborn CY, Mayberry LS, Wallston KA, Johnson KB, Elasy TA. Understanding patient portal use: implications for medication management. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (07) e133
• 12 Irizarry T, DeVito Dabbs A, Curran CR. Patient portals and patient engagement: a state of the science review. J Med Internet Res 2015; 17 (06) e148
• 13 Strekalova YA. Electronic health record use among cancer patients: insights from the Health Information National Trends Survey. Health Informatics J 2019; 25 (01) 83-90
• 14 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70 (01) 7-30
• 15 Soukup T, Lamb BW, Arora S, Darzi A, Sevdalis N, Green JS. Successful strategies in implementing a multidisciplinary team working in the care of patients with cancer: an overview and synthesis of the available literature. J Multidiscip Healthc 2018; 11: 49-61
• 16 Ahmadi M, Shahrokhi SN, Khavaninzadeh M, Alipour J. Development of a mobile-based self-care application for patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema in Iran. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (05) 935-948
• 17 Coughlin SS, Prochaska JJ, Williams LB. et al. Patient web portals, disease management, and primary prevention. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2017; 10: 33-40
• 18 Graff SL, Principe J, Fenton MAA. et al. Patient experience with breast cancer care delivered in a multidisciplinary clinic. JCO 2022; 40 (16, suppl): e13506-e13506
• 19 Basch E, Barbera L, Kerrigan CL, Velikova G. Implementation of patient-reported outcomes in routine medical care. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2018; 38: 122-134
• 20 Mody GN, Stover AM, Wang M. et al. Electronic patient-reported outcomes monitoring during lung cancer chemotherapy: a nested cohort within the PRO-TECT pragmatic trial (AFT-39). Lung Cancer 2021; 162: 1-8
• 21 Kim H, Mahmood A, Carlton E, Goldsmith J, Chang C, Bhuyan S. Access to personal health records and screening for breast and cervical cancer among women with a family history of cancer. J Cancer Educ 2020; 35 (06) 1128-1134
• 22 Coquet J, Blayney DW, Brooks JD, Hernandez-Boussard T. Association between patient-initiated emails and overall 2-year survival in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: evidence from the real-world setting. Cancer Med 2020; 9 (22) 8552-8561
• 23 Katsura C, Ogunmwonyi I, Kankam HK, Saha S. Breast cancer: presentation, investigation and management. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2022; 83 (02) 1-7
• 24 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372 (71) n71
• 25 Hing E, Hsiao CJ. Electronic medical record use by office-based physicians and their practices: United States, 2007. Natl Health Stat Rep 2010; (23) 1-11
• 26 Gerber DE, Laccetti AL, Chen B. et al. Predictors and intensity of online access to electronic medical records among patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 2014; 10 (05) e307-e312
• 27 Kindratt TB, Allicock M, Atem F, Dallo FJ, Balasubramanian BA. Email patient-provider communication and cancer screenings among US adults: cross-sectional study. JMIR Cancer 2021; 7 (03) e23790
• 28 Totzkay D, Silk KJ, Sheff SE. The effect of electronic health record use and patient-centered communication on cancer screening behavior: an analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey. J Health Commun 2017; 22 (07) 554-561
• 29 Yin Z, Warner JL, Malin BA. Learning when communications between healthcare providers indicate hormonal therapy medication discontinuation. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2018; 2018: 1591-1600
• 30 Yin Z, Warner JL, Chen Q, Malin BA. Patient messaging content associated with initiating hormonal therapy after a breast cancer diagnosis. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2020; 2019: 962-971
• 31 Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D. et al. Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 177 (01) 127-136
• 32 Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D. et al. A randomized intervention involving family to improve communication in breast cancer care. NPJ Breast Cancer 2021; 7 (01) 14
• 33 Crafoord MT, Fjell M, Sundberg K, Nilsson M, Langius-Eklöf A. Engagement in an interactive app for symptom self-management during treatment in patients with breast or prostate cancer: mixed methods study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22 (08) e17058
• 34 Dorfman CS, Stalls J, Lachman S, Shelby RA, Somers TJ, Oeffinger KC. Symptom communication preferences and communication barriers for young adult cancer survivors and their health care providers. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 2022; 11 (05) 506-517
• 35 Mougalian SS, Epstein LN, Jhaveri AP. et al. Bidirectional text messaging to monitor endocrine therapy adherence and patient-reported outcomes in breast cancer. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2017; 1 (01) 1-10
• 36 Hershman DL, Unger JM, Hillyer GC. et al. Randomized trial of text messaging to reduce early discontinuation of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy in women with early-stage breast cancer: SWOG S1105. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38 (19) 2122-2129
• 37 Moon Z, Moss-Morris R, Hunter MS, Carlisle S, Hughes LD. Barriers and facilitators of adjuvant hormone therapy adherence and persistence in women with breast cancer: a systematic review. Patient Prefer Adherence 2017; 11: 305-322
• 38 Krist AH, Woolf SH, Hochheimer C. et al. Harnessing information technology to inform patients facing routine decisions: cancer screening as a test case. Ann Fam Med 2017; 15 (03) 217-224
• 39 Krist AH, Woolf SH, Rothemich SF. et al. Interactive preventive health record to enhance delivery of recommended care: a randomized trial. Ann Fam Med 2012; 10 (04) 312-319
• 40 Antoun J. Electronic mail communication between physicians and patients: a review of challenges and opportunities. Fam Pract 2016; 33 (02) 121-126
• 41 Steitz BD, Sulieman L, Warner JL. et al. Classification and analysis of asynchronous communication content between care team members involved in breast cancer treatment. JAMIA Open 2021; 4 (03) ooab049
• 42 Hefner JL, MacEwan SR, Biltz A, Sieck CJ. Patient portal messaging for care coordination: a qualitative study of perspectives of experienced users with chronic conditions. BMC Fam Pract 2019; 20 (01) 57
• 43 Sieck CJ, Hefner JL, Schnierle J. et al. The rules of engagement: perspectives on secure messaging from experienced ambulatory patient portal users. JMIR Med Inform 2017; 5 (03) e13
• 44 Lynch D, Jedwab RM, Foster J. et al. Voting with their thumbs: assessing communication technology use by medical, nursing, midwifery, and allied health clinicians. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (04) 916-927
• 45 Hagedorn PA, Kirkendall ES, Spooner SA, Mohan V. Inpatient communication networks: leveraging secure text-messaging platforms to gain insight into inpatient communication systems. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (03) 471-478
• 46 Miller Jr DP, Latulipe C, Melius KA, Quandt SA, Arcury TA. Primary care providers' views of patient portals: interview study of perceived benefits and consequences. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18 (01) e8
• 47 Garrido T, Meng D, Wang JJ, Palen TE, Kanter MH. Secure e-mailing between physicians and patients: transformational change in ambulatory care. J Ambul Care Manage 2014; 37 (03) 211-218
• 48 Wynia MK, Torres GW, Lemieux J. Many physicians are willing to use patients' electronic personal health records, but doctors differ by location, gender, and practice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2011; 30 (02) 266-273
• 49 Vydra TP, Cuaresma E, Kretovics M, Bose-Brill S. Diffusion and use of tethered personal health records in primary care. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2015; 12 (Spring): 1c
• 50 Nath B, Williams B, Jeffery MM. et al. Trends in electronic health record inbox messaging during the COVID-19 pandemic in an ambulatory practice network in New England. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4 (10) e2131490
• 51 Trivedi N, Patel V, Johnson C, Chou WS. Barriers to accessing online medical records in the United States. Am J Manag Care 2021; 27 (01) 33-40
• 52 Casacchia NJ, Rosenthal GE, O'Connell NS. et al. Characteristics of adult primary care patients who use the patient portal: a cross-sectional analysis. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (05) 1053-1062
• 53 Turner K, Clary A, Hong YR, Alishahi Tabriz A, Shea CM. Patient portal barriers and group differences: cross-sectional national survey study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22 (09) e18870
• 54 Sinha S, Garriga M, Naik N. et al. Disparities in electronic health record patient portal enrollment among oncology patients. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7 (06) 935-937
• 55 Goel MS, Brown TL, Williams A, Hasnain-Wynia R, Thompson JA, Baker DW. Disparities in enrollment and use of an electronic patient portal. J Gen Intern Med 2011; 26 (10) 1112-1116
• 56 Senft N, Butler E, Everson J. Growing disparities in patient-provider messaging: trend analysis before and after supportive policy. J Med Internet Res 2019; 21 (10) e14976
• 57 Hefner JL, Sieck CJ, Walker DM. Patient and physician perspectives on training to improve communication through secure messaging: clarifying the rules of engagement. Health Care Manage Rev 2022; 47 (01) 3-11