4.5 Review

Patient-centered communication in the era of electronic health records: What does the evidence say?

Journal

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
Volume 100, Issue 1, Pages 50-64

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.031

Keywords

Patient-physician communication; Patient-physician relations; Electronic medical records; Electronic health records

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Patient-physician communication is essential for patient-centered health care. Physicians are concerned that electronic health records (EHRs) negatively affect communication with patients. This study identified a framework for understanding communication functions that influence patient outcomes. We then conducted a systematic review of the literature and organized it within the framework to better understand what is known. Method: A comprehensive search of three databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO) yielded 41 articles for analysis. Results: Results indicated that EHR use improves capture and sharing of certain biomedical information. However, it may interfere with collection of psychosocial and emotional information, and therefore may interfere with development of supportive, healing relationships. Patient access to the EHR and messaging functions may improve communication, patient empowerment, engagement, and self-management. Conclusion: More rigorous examination of EHR impacts on communication functions and their influences on patient outcomes is imperative for achieving patient-centered care. By focusing on the role of communication functions on patient outcomes, future EHRs can be developed to facilitate care. Practice implications: Training alone is likely to be insufficient to address disruptions to communication processes. Processes must be improved, and EHRs must be developed to capture useful data without interfering with physicians' and patients' abilities to effectively communicate. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available