title: Impact of health portal enrollment with email reminders on adherence to clinic appointments: a pilot study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Internet portal technologies that provide access to portions of electronic health records have the potential to revolutionize patients' involvement in their care. However, relatively few descriptions of the demographic characteristics of portal enrollees or of the effects of portal technology on quality outcomes exist. This study examined data from patients who attended one of seven Duke Medicine clinics and who were offered the option of enrolling in and using the Duke Medicine HealthView portal (HVP). The HVP allows patients to manage details of their appointment scheduling and provides automated email appointment reminders in addition to the telephone and mail reminders that all patients receive.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  Our objective was to test whether portal enrollment with an email reminder functionality is significantly related to decreases in rates of appointment "no-shows," which are known to impair clinic operational efficiency.
  
  
  METHODS
  Appointment activity during a 1-year period was examined for all patients attending one of seven Duke Medicine clinics. Patients were categorized as portal enrollees or as nonusers either by their status at time of appointment or at the end of the 1-year period. Demographic characteristics and no-show rates among these groups were compared. A binomial logistic regression model was constructed to measure the adjusted impact of HVP enrollment on no-show rates, given confounding factors. To demonstrate the effect of HVP use over time, monthly no-show rates were calculated for patient appointment keeping and contrasted between preportal and postportal deployment periods.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Across seven clinics, 58,942 patients, 15.7% (9239/58,942) of whom were portal enrollees, scheduled 198,199 appointments with an overall no-show rate of 9.9% (19,668/198,199). We found that HVP enrollees were significantly more likely to be female, white, and privately insured compared with nonusers. Bivariate no-show rate differences between portal enrollment groups varied widely according to patient- and appointment-level attributes. Large reductions in no-show rates were seen among historically disadvantaged groups: Medicaid holders (OR = 2.04 for nonuser/enrollee, 5.6% difference, P < .001), uninsured patients (OR = 2.60, 12.8% difference, P < .001), and black patients (OR = 2.13, 8.0% difference, P < .001). After fitting a binomial logistic regression model for the outcome of appointment arrival, the adjusted odds of arrival increased 39.0% for portal enrollees relative to nonusers (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.22 - 1.57, P < .001). Analysis of monthly no-show rates over 2 years demonstrated that patients who registered for portal access and received three reminders of upcoming appointments (email, phone, and mail) had a 2.0% no-show rate reduction (P < .001), whereas patients who did not enroll and only received traditional phone and mail reminders saw no such reduction (P < .09).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Monthly no-show rates across all seven Duke Medicine clinics were significantly reduced among patients who registered for portal use, suggesting that in combination with an email reminder feature, this technology may have an important and beneficial effect on clinic operations.
authors: Duke Health Technology Solutions, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, USA. monica.horvath@duke.edu
authors: Monica
authors: M
authors: Horvath
authors: Janet
authors: J
authors: Levy
authors: Pete
authors: P
authors: L'Engle
authors: Boyd
authors: B
authors: Carlson
authors: Asif
authors: A
authors: Ahmad
authors: Jeffrey
authors: J
authors: Ferranti
references: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;:1145
references: 17238764
references: N Engl J Med. 2010 Aug 5;363(6):501-4
references: 20647183
references: Am J Med. 2010 Jun;123(6):542-8
references: 20569761
references: Int J Med Inform. 2002 Dec 18;68(1-3):113-27
references: 12467796
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Jan-Feb;13(1):91-5
references: 16221943
references: Arch Intern Med. 2008 Sep 8;168(16):1776-82
references: 18779465
references: Aust Health Rev. 2006 Aug;30(3):389-96
references: 16879098
references: Can Oncol Nurs J. 2006 Fall;16(3):154-64
references: 17523576
references: J Fam Pract. 1978 Jul;7(1):199-201
references: 670914
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Nov-Dec;15(6):729-36
references: 18756002
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Mar;24(3):349-55
references: 19137379
references: J Med Pract Manage. 2007 May-Jun;22(6):368
references: 17612315
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007 Nov-Dec;14(6):798-806
references: 17712090
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):121-6
references: 16357345
references: AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;:871
references: 17238491
references: JAMA. 1983 Oct 7;250(13):1742-5
references: 6411944
references: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Jul-Aug;15(4):397-407
references: 18436896
references: New J (Inst Health Rec Inf Manag). 2006 Aug;47(4):17
references: 17552489
references: Int J Med Inform. 2010 Jan;79(1):65-70
references: 19783204
references: Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Oct;17(5):373-6
references: 18842978
references: Int J STD AIDS. 2009 Feb;20(2):142-3
references: 19182066
references: Am J Prev Med. 2007 May;32(5 Suppl):S131-3
references: 17466818