The benefits and harms of open notes in mental health: A Delphi survey of international experts

被引:16
作者
Blease, Charlotte [1 ]
Kharko, Anna [2 ]
Haegglund, Maria [3 ]
O'Neill, Stephen [1 ,4 ]
Wachenheim, Deborah [1 ]
Salmi, Liz [1 ]
Harcourt, Kendall [1 ]
Locher, Cosima [5 ,6 ]
DesRoches, Catherine M. [1 ,4 ]
Torous, John [4 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Gen Med & Primary Care, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[2] Univ Plymouth, Fac Hlth, Plymouth, Devon, England
[3] Uppsala Univ, Dept Womens & Childrens Hlth, Uppsala, Sweden
[4] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Univ Basel, Dept Clin Psychol & Psychotherapy, Basel, Switzerland
[6] Univ Zurich Hosp, Dept Consultat Liaison Psychiat & Psychosomat Med, Zurich, Switzerland
[7] Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Psychiat, Boston, MA 02215 USA
关键词
CLINICIAN; ACCESS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0258056
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Importance As of April 5, 2021, as part of the 21(st) Century Cures Act, new federal rules in the U.S. mandate that providers offer patients access to their online clinical records. Objective To solicit the view of an international panel of experts on the effects on mental health patients, including possible benefits and harms, of accessing their clinical notes. Design An online 3-round Delphi poll. Setting Online. Participants International experts identified as clinicians, chief medical information officers, patient advocates, and informaticians with extensive experience and/or research knowledge about patient access to mental health notes. Main outcomes, and measures An expert-generated consensus on the benefits and risks of sharing mental health notes with patients. Results A total of 70 of 92 (76%) experts from 6 countries responded to Round 1. A qualitative review of responses yielded 88 distinct items: 42 potential benefits, and 48 potential harms. A total of 56 of 70 (80%) experts responded to Round 2, and 52 of 56 (93%) responded to Round 3. Consensus was reached on 65 of 88 (74%) of survey items. There was consensus that offering online access to mental health notes could enhance patients' understanding about their diagnosis, care plan, and rationale for treatments, and that access could enhance patient recall and sense of empowerment. Experts also agreed that blocking mental health notes could lead to greater harms including increased feelings of stigmatization. However, panelists predicted there could be an increase in patients demanding changes to their clinical notes, and that mental health clinicians would be less detailed/accurate in documentation. Conclusions and relevance This iterative process of survey responses and ratings yielded consensus that there would be multiple benefits and few harms to patients from accessing their mental health notes. Questions remain about the impact of open notes on professional autonomy, and further empirical work into this practice innovation is warranted.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Patients, clinicians and open notes: information blocking as a case of epistemic injustice [J].
Blease, Charlotte ;
Salmi, Liz ;
Rexhepi, Hanife ;
Hagglund, Maria ;
DesRoches, Catherine M. .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2022, 48 (10) :785-793
[2]   Preparing Patients and Clinicians for Open Notes in Mental Health: Qualitative Inquiry of International Experts [J].
Blease, Charlotte ;
Torous, John ;
Kharko, Anna ;
DesRoches, Catherine M. ;
Harcourt, Kendall ;
O'Neill, Stephen ;
Salmi, Liz ;
Wachenheim, Deborah ;
Hagglund, Maria .
JMIR MENTAL HEALTH, 2021, 8 (04)
[3]   Association of Patients Reading Clinical Notes With Perception of Medication Adherence Among Persons With Serious Mental Illness [J].
Blease, Charlotte ;
Dong, Zhiyong ;
Torous, John ;
Walker, Jan ;
Hagglund, Maria ;
DesRoches, Catherine M. .
JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2021, 4 (03)
[4]   Does Patient Access to Clinical Notes Change Documentation? [J].
Blease, Charlotte ;
Torous, John ;
Hagglund, Maria .
FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 8
[5]   Patient Access to Mental Health Notes Motivating Evidence-Informed Ethical Guidelines [J].
Blease, Charlotte R. ;
O'Neill, Stephen F. ;
Torous, John ;
DesRoches, Catherine M. ;
Hagglund, Maria .
JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE, 2021, 209 (04) :265-269
[6]  
Braun V., 2006, Qualitative research in psychology, V3, P7, DOI [DOI 10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238, DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA]
[7]   Trust in Mental Health Clinicians Among Patients Who Access Clinical Notes Online [J].
Cromer, Risa ;
Denneson, Lauren M. ;
Pisciotta, Maura ;
Williams, Holly ;
Woods, Susan ;
Dobscha, Steven K. .
PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES, 2017, 68 (05) :520-523
[8]  
Custer R.L., 1999, Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, V15, P50, DOI [10.21061/jcte.v15i2.702, DOI 10.21061/JCTE.V15I2.702]
[9]   EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF GROUP OPINION - DELPHI METHOD [J].
DALKEY, N .
FUTURES, 1969, 1 (05) :408-426
[10]  
DesRoches, 2021, US POLICY REQUIRES I