×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Original Clinical Research

The Impact of Secure Messaging Telehealth Service on the Quality of Healthcare

By
Dong-Gil Ko Orcid logo
Dong-Gil Ko
Contact Dong-Gil Ko

Department of Operations, Business Analytics, and Information Systems, University of Cincinnati , Cincinnati , United States

Abstract

Background: Secure messaging within electronic health records (EHRs) is the fastest-growing component of virtual care in the telehealth ecosystem. It is a cost-effective way to communicate medical advice and an alternative to an in-person, video, or tele-phone visits. Secure messaging is shown to have a positive effect on the management of chronic diseases. It can improve health awareness and literacy and also improve communication and care coordination. Healthcare providers have experienced a 200% increase in secure messages over the past few years, and in some cases, it is associated with avoidance of medical visits and burn-out among healthcare providers. Such paradoxical outcomes raise questions about the value of secure messages and whether they positively impact the quality of healthcare outcomes.

Objective: To conduct an empirical assessment and evaluate the extent to which and for whom secure messages improve the quality of healthcare.

Methods: EHRs of adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and an active patient portal account who visited an academic medical center in the Midwest US between 2015 and 2020 were included in the analysis. Patients must have initiated a secure message, made a follow-up in-person appointment, and completed the CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) patient satisfaction survey.

Results: The final regression analysis included 1,332 patients with no missing data. The results reveal a negative relationship between patients who discuss their secure messages during their encounters and patient satisfaction even after controlling for patient-specific (age, gender, and insurance), provider-specific (responsiveness), and medical conditions (average blood sugar and mean arterial pressure). The results also show a stronger negative effect for the underrepresented minorities (Blacks and Hispanics).

Summary: The negative relationship between secure message exchanges and patient satisfaction may stem from differences in providers’ subject matter expertise and their mental models that are incongruent with patients’ general health knowledge. This suggests that patients may struggle to understand the value of new information, assimilate it, and apply it. Furthermore, effective communication is fundamental to patient satisfaction, and healthcare providers may be challenged to instill greater understanding during their average 18-min encounters. The proliferation of digital divide research in healthcare indicates that Afro-Americans and Hispanic Americans are at a disadvantage; therefore, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the health literacy rate differs, possibly creating greater uncertainty and ambiguity. More research probing the role and value of secure messaging is needed as healthcare providers begin to charge patients for this telehealth service.

References

1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2019;
2.
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.
3.
Holmgren AJ, Downing NL, Tang M, Sharp C, Longhurst C, Huckman RS. Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinician ambulatory electronic health record use. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2022;29(3):453–60.
4.
Charleson K. Telehealth statistics and trends: A 2021 report. 2021;
5.
Raths D. Health systems begin charging for some portal message responses. 2021;
6.
Bao C, Bardhan IR, Singh H, Meyer BA, Kirksey K. Patient–Provider Engagement and its Impact on Health Outcomes: A Longitudinal Study of Patient Portal Use. MIS Quarterly. 2020;44(2):699–723.
7.
Ko DG, Dennis AR. Profiting from Knowledge Management: The Impact of Time and Experience. Information Systems Research. 2011;22(1):134–52.
8.
Ancarani A, Di Mauro C, Giammanco MD. Patient satisfaction, managers’ climate orientation and organizational climate. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 2011;31(3):224–50.
9.
Salzarulo PA, Bretthauer KM, Côté MJ, Schultz KL. The Impact of Variability and Patient Information on Health Care System Performance. Production and Operations Management. 2011;20(6):848–59.
10.
Ordaz OH, Croff RL, Robinson LD, Shea SA, Bowles NP. Optimization of Primary Care Among Black Americans Using Patient Portals: Qualitative Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 23(6):e27820.
11.
Ko DG, Mai F, Shan Z, Zhang D. Operational efficiency and patient-centered healthcare: A view from online physician reviews. *Journal of Operations Management. 2019;65*(4:353–79.
12.
Ko, Kirsch, King. Antecedents of Knowledge Transfer from Consultants to Clients in Enterprise System Implementations. MIS Quarterly. 2005;29(1):59.
13.
March JG. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science. 1991;2(1):71–87.
14.
Shiraly R, Mahdaviazad H, Pakdin A. Doctor-patient communication skills: a survey on knowledge and practice of Iranian family physicians. BMC Family Practice. 2021;22(1).
15.
Mai F, Ko DG, Shan Z, Zhang D. The Impact of Accelerated Digitization on Patient Portal Use by Underprivileged Racial Minority Groups During COVID-19: Longitudinal Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 25:e44981.
16.
Smith SG, O’Conor R, Aitken W, Curtis LM, Wolf MS, Goel MS. Disparities in registration and use of an online patient portal among older adults: findings from the LitCog cohort. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2015;22(4):888–95.

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.