| 31. |
- Hägglund, Maria, Lektor, 1975-, et al.
(författare)
-
The NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey : Cross-Sectional Study of National Patient Portal Users in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Internet Research. - : JMIR Publications. - 1438-8871. ; 25
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Although many surveys have been conducted on patients accessing their own health records in recent years, there is a limited amount of nationwide cross-country data available on patients' views and preferences. To address this gap, an international survey of patient users was conducted in the Nordic eHealth project, NORDeHEALTH. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the sociodemographic characteristics and experiences of patients who accessed their electronic health records (EHRs) through national patient portals in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was distributed using the national online health portals. The target participants were patients who accessed the national patient portals at the start of 2022 and who were aged ≥15 years. The survey included a mixture of close-ended and free-text questions about participant sociodemographics, usability experience, experiences with health care and the EHR, reasons for reading health records online, experience with errors, omissions and offense, opinions about security and privacy, and the usefulness of portal functions. In this paper, we summarized the data on participant demographics, past experience with health care, and the patient portal through descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In total, 29,334 users completed the survey, of which 9503 (32.40%) were from Norway, 13,008 (44.35%) from Sweden, 4713 (16.07%) from Finland, and 2104 (7.17%) from Estonia. National samples were comparable according to reported gender, with about two-thirds identifying as women (19,904/29,302, 67.93%). Age distributions were similar across the countries, but Finland had older users while Estonia had younger users. The highest attained education and presence of health care education varied among the national samples. In all 4 countries, patients most commonly rated their health as "fair" (11,279/29,302, 38.48%). In Estonia, participants were more often inclined to rate their health positively, whereas Norway and Sweden had the highest proportion of negative health ratings. Across the whole sample, most patients received some care in the last 2 years (25,318/29,254, 86.55%). Mental health care was more common (6214/29,254, 21.24%) than oncological care (3664/29,254, 12.52%). Overall, most patients had accessed their health record "2 to 9 times" (11,546/29,306, 39.4%), with the most frequent users residing in Sweden, where about one-third of patients accessed it "more than 20 times" (4571/13,008, 35.14%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first large-scale international survey to compare patient users' sociodemographics and experiences with accessing their EHRs. Although the countries are in close geographic proximity and demonstrate similar advancements in giving their residents online records access, patient users in this survey differed. We will continue to investigate patients' experiences and opinions about national patient-accessible EHRs through focused analyses of the national and combined data sets from the NORDeHEALTH 2022 Patient Survey.
|
|
| 32. |
- Bärkås, Annika, et al.
(författare)
-
Errors, Omissions, and Offenses in the Health Record of Mental Health Care Patients : Results from a Nationwide Survey in Sweden
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Internet Research. - : JMIR Publications. - 1438-8871. ; 25
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Previous research reports that patients with mental health conditions experience benefits, for example, increased empowerment and validation, from reading their patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). In mental health care (MHC), PAEHRs remain controversial, as health care professionals are concerned that patients may feel worried or offended by the content of the notes. Moreover, existing research has focused on specific mental health diagnoses, excluding the larger PAEHR userbase with experience in MHC. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to establish if and how the experiences of patients with and those without MHC differ in using their PAEHRs by (1) comparing patient characteristics and differences in using the national patient portal between the 2 groups and (2) establishing group differences in the prevalence of negative experiences, for example, rates of errors, omissions, and offenses between the 2 groups. METHODS: Our analysis was performed on data from an online patient survey distributed through the Swedish national patient portal as part of our international research project, NORDeHEALTH. The respondents were patient users of the national patient portal 1177, aged 15 years or older, and categorized either as those with MHC experience or with any other health care experience (nonmental health care [non-MHC]). Patient characteristics such as gender, age, education, employment, and health status were gathered. Portal use characteristics included frequency of access, encouragement to read the record, and instances of positive and negative experiences. Negative experiences were further explored through rates of error, omission, and offense. The data were summarized through descriptive statistics. Group differences were analyzed through Pearson chi-square. RESULTS: Of the total sample (N=12,334), MHC respondents (n=3131) experienced errors (1586/3131, 50.65%, and non-MHC 3311/9203, 35.98%), omissions (1089/3131, 34.78%, and non-MHC 2427/9203, 26.37%) and offenses (1183/3131, 37.78%, and non-MHC 1616/9203, 17.56%) in the electronic health record at a higher rate than non-MHC respondents (n=9203). Respondents reported that the identified error (MHC 795/3131, 50.13%, and non-MHC 1366/9203, 41.26%) and omission (MHC 622/3131, 57.12%, and non-MHC 1329/9203, 54.76%) were "very important," but most did nothing to correct them (MHC 792/3131, 41.29%, and non-MHC 1838/9203, 42.17%). Most of the respondents identified as women in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: About 1 in 2 MHC patients identified an error in the record, and about 1 in 3 identified an omission, both at a much higher rate than in the non-MHC group. Patients with MHC also felt offended by the content of the notes more commonly (1 in 3 vs 1 in 6). These findings validate some of the worries expressed by health care professionals about providing patients with MHC with PAEHRs and highlight challenges with the documentation quality in the records.
|
|
| 33. |
- Moll, Jonas, 1982-, et al.
(författare)
-
Sociotechnical Cross-Country Analysis of Contextual Factors That Impact Patients’ Access to Electronic Health Records in 4 European Countries : Framework Evaluation Study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Internet Research. - : JMIR Publications. - 1438-8871. ; 26
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The NORDeHEALTH project studies patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Such country comparisons require an analysis of the sociotechnical context of these services. Although sociotechnical analyses of PAEHR services have been carried out in the past, a framework specifically tailored to in-depth cross-country analysis has not been developed. Objective: This study aims to develop and evaluate a method for a sociotechnical analysis of PAEHRs that advances a framework for sociotechnical analysis of eHealth solutions first presented by Sittig and Singh. This first article in a series presents the development of the method and a cross-country comparison of the contextual factors that enable PAEHR access and use. Methods: The dimensions of the framework for sociotechnical analysis were thoroughly discussed and extended in a series of workshops with international stakeholders, all being eHealth researchers focusing on PAEHRs. All countries were represented in the working group to make sure that important national perspectives were covered. A spreadsheet with relevant questions related to the studied services and the various dimensions of the sociotechnical framework was constructed and distributed to the 4 participating countries, and the project participants researched various national sources to provide the relevant data for the comparisons in the 10 sociotechnical dimensions. Results: In total, 3 dimensions were added to the methodology of Sittig and Singh to separate clinical content from features and functions of PAEHRs and demonstrate basic characteristics of the different countries regarding national and regional steering of health care and information and communications technology developments. The final framework contained the following dimensions: metadata; hardware and software computing infrastructure; features and functions; clinical content shared with patients; human-computer interface; people; workflow and communication; the health care organization’s internal policies, procedures, and culture; national rules, regulations, and incentives; system measurement and monitoring; and health care system context. The dimensions added during the study mostly concerned background information needed for cross-country comparisons in particular. Several similarities were identified among the compared countries, especially regarding hardware and software computing infrastructure. All countries had, for example, one national access point, and patients are provided a PAEHR automatically. Most of the differences could be identified in the health care system context dimension. One important difference concerned the governing of information and communications technology development, where different levels (state, region, and municipality) were responsible in different countries. Conclusions: This is the first large-scale international sociotechnical analysis of services for patients to access their electronic health records; this study compared services in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. A methodology for such an analysis was developed and is presented to enable comparison studies in other national contexts to enable future implementations and evaluations of PAEHRs.
|
|
| 34. |
- Hägglund, Maria, Lektor, 1975-, et al.
(författare)
-
A Nordic Perspective on Patient Online Record Access and the European Health Data Space
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Internet Research. - : JMIR Publications. - 1438-8871. ; 26:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Nordic countries are, together with the United States, forerunners in online record access (ORA), which has now become widespread. The importance of accessible and structured health data has also been highlighted by policy makers internationally. To ensure the full realization of ORA’s potential in the short and long term, there is a pressing need to study ORA from a cross-disciplinary, clinical, humanistic, and social sciences perspective that looks beyond strictly technical aspects. In this viewpoint paper, we explore the policy changes in the European Health Data Space (EHDS) proposal to advance ORA across the European Union, informed by our research in a Nordic-led project that carries out the first of its kind, large-scale international investigation of patients’ ORA—NORDeHEALTH (Nordic eHealth for Patients: Benchmarking and Developing for the Future). We argue that the EHDS proposal will pave the way for patients to access and control third-party access to their electronic health records. In our analysis of the proposal, we have identified five key principles for ORA: (1) the right to access, (2) proxy access, (3) patient input of their own data, (4) error and omission rectification, and (5) access control. ORA implementation today is fragmented throughout Europe, and the EHDS proposal aims to ensure all European citizens have equal online access to their health data. However, we argue that in order to implement the EHDS, we need more research evidence on the key ORA principles we have identified in our analysis. Results from the NORDeHEALTH project provide some of that evidence, but we have also identified important knowledge gaps that still need further exploration.
|
|
| 35. |
|
|
| 36. |
- Nijsingh, Niels, 1977, et al.
(författare)
-
Ethics of Screening
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Encyclopedia of Public Health, 2nd Edition, Volume 3. Stella R.Quah (ed.). - Oxford, U.K. : Academic Press (Elsevier). - 9780128037089 ; , s. 28-35
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 37. |
|
|
| 38. |
- Cutas, Daniela, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
Legal imperialism in the regulation of stem cell research and therapy: the problem of extraterritorial jurisdiction
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Capps BJ & Campbell AV (eds.). CONTESTED CELLS: Global Perspectives on the Stem Cell Debate. - London : Imperial College Press. - 9781848164376 ; , s. 95-119
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Countries worldwide have very different national regulations on human embryonic stem (ES) cell research, informed by a range of ethical values. Some countries find reason to extend the applicability of their regulations on such research to its citizens when they visit other countries. Extraterritorial jurisdiction has recently been identified as a potential challenge towards global regulation of ES cell research. This chapter explores the implications and impact of extraterritorial jurisdiction and global regulation of ES cell research on researchers, clinicians and national health systems, and how this may affect patients. The authors argue that it would make ethical sense for ES cell restrictive countries to extend its regulations on ES cell research beyond its borders, because, if these countries really consider embryo destruction to be objectionable on the basis on the status of the embryo, then they ought to count it morally on par with murder (and thus have a moral imperative to protect embryos from the actions of its own citizens). However, doing so could lead to a legal situation that would result in substantial harm to central values in areas besides research, such as health care, the job market, basic freedom of movement, and strategic international finance and politics. Thus, it seems that restrictive extraterritorial jurisdiction in respect to ES cell research would be deeply problematic, given that the ethical permissibility of ES cell research is characterised by deep and wide disagreement.
|
|
| 39. |
- Barenfeld, Emmelie, 1981, et al.
(författare)
-
Supporting decision-making by a health promotion programme : Experiences of persons ageing in the context of migration
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being. - : Taylor & Francis. - 1748-2623 .- 1748-2631. ; 12:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study is part of the Promoting Aging Migrants’ Capabilities programme that applied person-centred group meetings and one individual home visit to prolong independence in daily activities among people ≥70 years who had migrated to Sweden from Finland or the Western Balkan region. With the purpose to understand programme outcomes, the study aimed to explore the participants’ everyday experiences of using health-promoting messages exchanged during the programme. Using a grounded theory approach, 12 persons aged 70- 83 years were interviewed six months to one year after their participation in the programme. The participants experienced how using health-promoting messages was a dynamic process of how to make decisions on taking action to satisfy health-related needs of oneself or others immediately or deferring action. Five sub-processes were also identified: gaining inner strength, meeting challenges in available resources, being attentive to what is worth knowing, approaching health risks, and identifying opportunities to advocate for others. The results suggest that the programme could develop personal skills to support older people who have migrated to overcome health-related challenges. They further demonstrate the importance of supporting their health literacy before personal resources hinder action, and call for research on programmes to overcome environmental barriers to health.
|
|
| 40. |
- Nilsson, Kerstin
(författare)
-
To work or not to work in an extended working life? Factors in working and retirement decisions
- 2013
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In most of the industrialised world, the proportion of older and retired people in the population is continuously increasing. This will have budgetary implications for maintaining the welfare state, because the active working section of the population must fund the non-active and old population. Aim: The overall aim of this thesis was to obtain knowledge about older workers’ work and life situation in association with their planning and decision to retire from working life. Method: The thesis includes one qualitative and three quantitative studies conducted in Sweden. Result: Self-rated health was found to be a better measure than diagnosed disease of whether older workers believed they could work until 65 years or beyond. Health seems not to be a general impediment to working in old age if older workers are satisfied with their work situation and have enough time and opportunities to recover from fatigue. In one of Sweden’s most hazardous work environments, older workers were not injured significantly more often than younger workers. Good mental and physical work environment, moderate working pace and working time, and the right competence and possibility for skills development were factors determining whether older workers believed they can extend their working life. Attitude to older workers in the organisation, motivation and work satisfaction were factors determining whether older workers want to extend working life. Health, personal economic incentives, family/leisure pursuits and attitude to pension in society affected both whether people believed they can and wanted to extend their working life. In their final retirement decision, older workers considered: i) their possibility to balance and adapt functional ageing and health to a sustainable work situation; ii) their economic situation; iii) possibilities for social inclusion and coherence; and iv) possibilities for meaningful activities. Whether these requirements were best fulfilled in or outside working life determined the decision to continue working or to retire. Conclusion: If it is desirable for society that people will to extend their working life, both the “can work” and the “want to work” factors need to be met. It is important to provide a good fit inside working life. This requires a focus not only on older workers, but also on organisations and managers in order to provide incentives that keep older workers in the work force.
|
|
