PEDIATRICS Vol. 109 No. 5 May 2002, pp. 740-744
Parent and Physician Attitudes Regarding Electronic Communication in Pediatric Practices
* Center for Pediatric Research, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia
Department of Information Services, Children’s Hospital of The King’s Daughters, Norfolk, Virginia
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Objective. To determine 1) the electronic mail (e-mail) capabilities of families, general pediatricians (GPs), and subspecialty pediatricians (SPs) from an integrated pediatric health care delivery system and 2) the knowledge base and attitudes of these groups regarding the potential issues involved in using e-mail for physician-patient communication.
Methods. Parents were interviewed in the offices of participating practices using a standardized survey tool. Pediatricians and staff were interviewed using a separate instrument. The data were entered into a database for analysis.
Results. A total of 325 parents and 37 physicians were interviewed. Fifty-seven percent of the 161 parents who were interviewed at the GP offices and 66% of the 164 families that were interviewed at SP offices had access to e-mail. Parents aged 31 to 40 years were significantly more likely to have access to e-mail than parents of other age groups. Access to e-mail increased with family income and parental education. Most (74%) parents who were interviewed expressed interest in using e-mail to contact their child’s physician/physician’s office for several purposes, including getting information or test results, scheduling appointments, and/or discussing a particular symptom. Although both groups of parents expressed concerns about confidentiality, parents at the GP offices were significantly more concerned (medianGP = 95 vs medianSP = 70). Seventy-four percent of GPs and 100% of SPs had access to e-mail; however, 79% did not want to use e-mail for physician-patient communication, citing concerns about confidentiality and the time demands that patient e-mail might engender.
Conclusions. The majority of parents and pediatricians at both general and subspecialty pediatric offices are capable of communicating electronically. Parents and pediatricians are aware of the issues surrounding e-mail use for patient communication. Most parents express an interest in using e-mail for patient-physician communications, whereas most physicians are opposed to this practice.
Key Words: e-mail • Internet • physician-patient communication • electronic communication
Abbreviations: e-mail, electronic mail • GP, general pediatrician • SP, specialty pediatrician
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Access to electronic mail (e-mail) among the general population has significantly increased in the past 3 years, and it seems that this trend will continue. Whereas in 1997 approximately 30% of Americans were online, in 2000 this number was 59%. Furthermore, the number of US households online has increased from 16% to 49% in that same period.1 A recent survey found that 45% of the US population uses e-mail.2
E-mail provides several unique advantages over the telephone for patient-physician communication. E-mail does not require participating parties to be simultaneously present and therefore creates continuous access to the health care system.3 E-mail also provides better documentation of communication and the potential for close monitoring of patients who have chronic conditions. Articles have discussed the use of patient-physician communication via e-mail,4,5 and patients are beginning to request this service.6 Some physicians report that e-mail use saves time.7 Some health care Web sites now offer this avenue to physicians and their patients.
Concerns engendered by patient-physician electronic communication have been documented.3,5,8 The requirement for hardware and software and the complexity of potential problems separates e-mail from more traditional means of communication. Greater access to e-mail among more educated and affluent families has been called the "digital divide,"9,10 adding to disparities in health care access.3 The potential for messages to be intercepted, misdirected, or visible to others with access can compromise physician-patient confidentiality.8 The asynchronous nature of e-mail creates a degree of time delay that may impede therapy if the modality is inappropriately used for a medical emergency.11
The degree of awareness concerning these issues among patients and physicians is unclear. Also, the technological capability and interest of pediatric physicians and their patients to communicate electronically is not known. It might be anticipated that older, poorer, or less well-educated parents might be less able or less likely to use the Internet to communicate with their physicians. Because parents of a child who has a medical problem might be more inclined to use the Internet for information, there is a possibility that the parent populations differ between specialty offices and general pediatrics offices. This study set forth to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and technologic readiness of pediatric physicians and their patient families regarding physician-patient communication via e-mail as well as assess and account for any differences in parent demographics and office types.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Two survey tools were developed, one for patients/parents and the other for physicians (available on request). Parents were approached consecutively in the waiting rooms of participating practices in an integrated pediatric health care delivery system. Parents were interviewed on weekdays as they waited for appointments with their child’s physician. Physicians were interviewed at their convenience. Both sets of surveys were administered via face-to-face interview. Demographic information, access to e-mail, and the subjects’ attitudes regarding e-mail use for physician-patient communication were obtained. Strength of feeling was measured using a 0 to 100 visual analog scale.12 Beliefs and attitudes regarding confidentiality and safety of e-mail use were measured on a 0 to 100 scale, with 0 being not at all concerned and 100 being very concerned. The data were entered into an Access database without participant identifiers. The protocol and forms received approval from the local institutional review board.
Statistical Methods
Comparison of distributions between groups was made using Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. Significant associations among categorical variables were determined with Pearson 
2 (for the large parent sample) and Fisher exact test (for the small physician sample). Logistic regression was used to assess the effect of age, education level, and family income on access to e-mail. Comparing crude and adjusted odds ratios assessed confounding. Within each variable, the largest category was selected as the referent category with the exception of annual family income, where the median income level was selected as the referent category. Two-sided P values <.05 were considered significant. Analysis was conducted using Stata version 6.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Interviews were initiated for parents of 325 children, 161 at 4 general pediatrics (GP) offices and 164 at 4 specialty pediatrician (SP) offices. Sixteen surveys were incomplete as a result of patients’ being called in for their doctor’s appointment or parental refusal. Thus, a total of 309 surveys were fully completed, and answers that were available for all surveys were included in the analysis. A few parents declined participation in the interview, but no data are available about these families.
Table 1 compares demographic characteristics: ethnicity, age, education, and annual income for parents and ethnicity, age, gender, and patient load per week for physicians among GP and SP offices. The proportion with e-mail access for parents and physicians at each office type is also compared in Table 1. Specialties represented were hematology, endocrinology, surgery, and otolaryngology. No significant demographic differences were noted with the exception of parental age (P < .001) and family annual income (P = .028).
|
Fifty-seven percent of parents at GP offices and 66% of parents at SP offices had access to e-mail at work, home, and/or another location. No difference in access to e-mail between parents at GP and SP offices was noted (P = .126). Table 2 displays the effect of parental age, education, and family income on parental access to e-mail. After taking into account parent education level and family income, the odds that those who were aged 41 to 50 years had e-mail access were less than half of the odds that those who were 31 to 40 years had e-mail access (P = .028). The odds of having e-mail access for those who were currently attending college or had a college degree were 3 to 4 times greater than those who had only a high school diploma, even after adjusting for age and income (P < .05). The odds of having e-mail access for those who had the lowest annual family income (<$20 000) were 7 times less than those who had annual incomes between $20 000 and $35 000, whose odds were, in turn, 3 times less than the odds for those who had family incomes between $35 000 and $60 000 (P < .001, P = .004). Also, the odds of having e-mail access for those who earned >$100 000 annually were almost 5 times greater than for those who earned between $35 000 and $60 000 (P = .059). In general, e-mail access increased as parental education and annual family income increased.
|
Seventy-one percent of families at GP offices and 76% of families at SP offices expressed an interest in using e-mail to contact their physician or physician’s office. Figure 1 reveals that parents showed an equally high level of interest for using e-mail to schedule appointments, get test results, refill prescriptions, ask questions about their child’s health, get additional information about their child’s condition, and discuss their child’s symptoms.
|
However, when asked, "How concerned are you that by using e-mail for medical issues, personal medical information about you or your child will become available to people who should not have access to the information," parents at SP offices expressed significantly more concern about confidentiality than did parents at GP offices (medianSP = 95 vs medianGP = 70; P = .01). Figure 2 displays histograms of the level of concern associated with using e-mail for communication with their physician office by type of practice. Twenty percent of parents at GP offices expressed little to no concern, whereas 55% expressed a great deal of concern. Similarly, at SP offices, 28% of parents expressed little to no concern, whereas 43% of parents at SP offices were highly concerned. Although there is a wide range of concern, this bimodal distribution from both types of practice indicates that the parents had either great concern or very little concern about the confidentiality of e-mail. When asked, "How safe do you think e-mail is for privacy?" where 0 is unsafe and 100 is totally safe, the parents responded with a mean score of 50 for both the SP and GP groups.
|
SPs had significantly greater access to e-mail than GPs (100% vs 74%; P = .02). Seventy-nine percent of both GPs and SPs did not want to communicate directly with patients via e-mail. Physicians were more open to having their office staff members communicate with patients via e-mail. Sixty-four percent of SPs and 18% of GPs were inclined to have their office staff use e-mail to communicate with patients, whereas 21% of SPs and 64% of GPs were undecided about this option. Only 18% of GPs and 14% of SPs said that they would not allow it.
Physicians in general believed that e-mail communication with patients would increase their workload. There was no substantive difference between physician type and potential uses for e-mail; therefore, responses for GPs and SPs are combined. Of the 10 physicians who responded that they would personally use e-mail to communicate with patients, 6 would use e-mail to provide additional information to patients and only 1 would use e-mail to schedule appointments or deliver test results. Among the 20 physicians who approved of their office staff using e-mail for patient communication, 70% believed that e-mail could function to schedule appointments and only 20% thought that office staff should use e-mail to give test results.
Confidentiality and safety are considerable concerns for physicians. Both GPs and SPs ranked their concern about confidentiality at 75 on a 100-point scale. GPs gave e-mail safety a median rank of 25, and SPs assigned a median rank of 30, where a score of 0 indicates no safety and 100 indicates confidence in safety. Eighty percent of physicians indicated that they believed that their workload would either increase or greatly increase if they were to communicate with their patients using e-mail.
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Our survey shows that 57% to 66% of the parents interviewed have access to e-mail. This is similar to the published numbers for the United States.1 E-mail access was related to the parent’s age, parent’s education level, and family income. The finding that income and education are primary factors in determining e-mail access is consistent with previous surveys.1,2 Surprisingly, we did not find that younger parents are more likely to have access to e-mail. Rather, parents between 31 and 40 years of age were the most likely to have access to e-mail after adjusting for education and income. The deviation from the trend in increasing e-mail access with education among those parents who are presently attending college suggests the role of family income on access to e-mail.
One limitation of the study is the generalizability of the parent population found in these offices. The urban and suburban city setting of the pediatric health care system from which our sample was drawn lends itself to a highly diverse ethnic population, many with low annual incomes. Because each of these factors influences access to technology, our parent-based conclusions may be skewed slightly. Nonetheless, parents were highly in favor of some type of electronic communication with their physician offices. In addition, few physicians were sampled. The small sample size certainly limits the interpretation and widespread application of physician-based results.
Parents of children who have chronic illnesses might be more inclined to use the Internet for medical information. For that reason, we hypothesized that parents from SP offices might be more inclined to have e-mail access and desire to use e-mail for physician communication and compared responses of parents from GP and SP offices. We found no difference between these 2 groups in their access to e-mail or their desire to communicate electronically with their physicians. Parents at GP offices were more concerned about confidentiality.
Patients and their parents are becoming more Internet savvy; more than half of the parents we interviewed reported that they had used the Internet to get answers to health care questions (data not shown). Parents showed a strong interest in using e-mail for a broad range of purposes from scheduling appointments to discussing a child’s symptoms. In a similar vein, Neill et al13 found that 90% of patients who use e-mail to contact their physician send important and private medical information via this medium.
Although the majority of parents favor electronic communication with physicians, they are aware of potential problems with confidentiality and safety surrounding this medium. We speculate that the reason for their limited concern is that the patients are children. Conceivably, the respondents would be more concerned about safety and/or confidentiality if their own health issues were involved. Adolescents may also be more concerned about parents or other family members seeing physician-patient e-mail. We did not interview adolescent patients in our survey.
The majority of physicians in our survey have the hardware and software to communicate electronically. At this institution, a concerted effort was made to connect all full-time academic faculty to e-mail. This included all of the SPs interviewed and explains why SPs had a higher degree of e-mail capability than the GPs. The disparity between SP and GP access to and use of electronic communication indicates that this may be a point where education should be targeted. Although at the time of the survey 26% of GPs did not have Internet access at their offices, there has been a subsequent effort to ensure that GPs are also connected.
Although the physicians were generally opposed to answering patients’ e-mail inquiries themselves, the majority were responsive to the idea of having their office staff use e-mail for patient communication. Among physicians, concerns about confidentiality, time demands, and increase in workload motivated an opinion against electronic communication with patients. Borowitz and Wyatt14 reported on a subspecialty consultation service available via the Internet. Although they found that the time commitment was only approximately 4 minutes per day, this may not reflect the time commitment for physicians with established patient-physician relationships. These concerns are valid as there is potential for release of confidential information (accidental or intentional) and delays in treatment.8 To address some of these issues, guidelines for physician-patient electronic communication have been published.15
Although we found that a relatively small percentage of physicians were open to the use of e-mail communication, an e-health network survey of physician e-mail use with patients found that 10% of physicians interact with patients via e-mail at least 1 time a week.16 This percentage is a 200% increase in less than a year. Some systems are also beginning to reimburse physicians for their time spent in e-mail communications with patients.17
Many of the potential e-mail benefits identified in this survey involve the interaction of patients and office staff. Most physicians were more accepting of this use than they were for their own involvement. Although many published discussions of e-mail use include these roles, there are few published data on the attitudes of physicians or office staff. Patient e-mail communications directed through an office staff triage system could decrease the time demands on physicians while meeting most of the families’ desires. It would be important for patients to be aware that a staff member is screening their communications directed to the physician.
Several sociologic and legal factors will ultimately determine the future of physician-patient e-mail communication. Increasing access to e-mail and ongoing time constraints of the American population are factors that might prompt patients to demand this service. Case law will establish whether there is an increased or decreased malpractice liability through the implementation of electronic communication. Third-party payers must determine whether there will be compensation for physician time outside of the standard face-to-face encounter. Finally, the forthcoming Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations will define standards for privacy and security regarding medical information transmitted electronically. The unfolding of these issues will surely have an impact on the future of patient-physician relationships as the world becomes increasingly dependent on electronic communications.
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Received for publication Jun 7, 2001; Accepted Dec 5, 2001.
Reprint requests to (E.J.W.) Department of Hematology, 610 Children’s La, Norfolk, VA 23507. E-mail: ewerner{at}chkd.com
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
- Taylor H. Internet Access Continues to Grow But at a Slower Pace. Harris Interactive;2000 . Available at: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=122. Accessed March 2, 2002
- US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, National Telecommunications and Information Administration. A nation online: how Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Available at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/div/index.html. Accessed March 2,2002
-
Mandl KD, Kohane IS, Brandt AM. Electronic patient-physician communication: problems and promise.
Ann Intern Med.1998; 129
:495
–500
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Jeffords R, Scheidt M, Thibadoux GM. Physician-patient electronic communications. Med Group Manage J.1999; 16 :46 –49
-
Kuppersmith RB. Is E-mail an effective medium for physician-patient interactions?
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg.1999; 125
:468
–470
[Free Full Text] -
Roemer L. Doctor, you’ve got E-mail.
JAMA.1999; 282
:729; discussion 730
[Free Full Text] - Harris ED. Electronic mail. A physician extender? West J Med.1997; 166 :123 –125[Medline]
-
Spielberg AR. On call and online: sociohistorical, legal, and ethical implications of e-mail for the patient-physician relationship.
JAMA.1998; 280
:1353
–1359
[Abstract/Free Full Text] -
Hoffman DL, Novak TP. Bridging the racial divide on the Internet.
Science.1998; 280
:390
–391
[Free Full Text] - Katz J, Aspden P. Social and public policy Internet research: goals and achievements. Available at: http://www.communitytechnology.org/aspden/aspden_talk.html. Accessed March 2,2002
-
Eysenbach G, Diepgen TL. Responses to unsolicited patient e-mail requests for medical advice on the World Wide Web.
JAMA.1998; 280
:1333
–1335
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Streiner D, Norman G. Scaling Responses. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc;1995
-
Neill RA, Mainous AG 3rd, Clark JR, Hagen MD. The utility of electronic mail as a medium for patient-physician communication.
Arch Fam Med.1994; 3
:268
–271
[Abstract/Free Full Text] -
Borowitz SM, Wyatt JC. The origin, content, and workload of e-mail consultations.
JAMA.1998; 280
:1321
–1324
[Abstract/Free Full Text] -
Kane B, Sands DZ. Guidelines for the clinical use of electronic mail with patients. The AMIA Internet Working Group, Task Force on Guidelines for the Use of Clinic-Patient Electronic Mail.
J Am Med Inform Assoc.1998; 5
:104
–111
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Mariano G. Physicians reach out to patients online. CNET News.com;2000 . Available at: http://medem.com/corporate/xl_corporate_medeminthenews_detail. cfm? Extranet Press Newskey=90. Accessed March 2, 2002
- Appleby J. Insurers, doctors ponder implications of e-consultations. USA Today.2001; March 26:1B, 5B
PEDIATRICS (ISSN 1098-4275). ©2002 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Wallwiener, C. W. Wallwiener, J. K. Kansy, H. Seeger, and T. K. Rajab Impact of electronic messaging on the patient-physician interaction J Telemed Telecare, July 1, 2009; 15(5): 243 - 250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Chen, T. Garrido, D. Chock, G. Okawa, and L. Liang The Kaiser Permanente Electronic Health Record: Transforming And Streamlining Modalities Of Care Health Aff., March 1, 2009; 28(2): 323 - 333. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. N. Forjuoh, M. D. Reis, G. R. Couchman, M. G. Ory, S. Mason, and S. Molonket-Lanning Incorporating PDA Use in Diabetes Self-Care: A Central Texas Primary Care Research Network (CenTexNet) Study J Am Board Fam Med, July 1, 2007; 20(4): 375 - 384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R D Goldman and A Macpherson Internet health information use and e-mail access by parents attending a paediatric emergency department Emerg. Med. J., May 1, 2006; 23(5): 345 - 348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Y. Mann, M. A. Lloyd-Puryear, and D. Linzer Enhancing Communication in the 21st Century Pediatrics, May 1, 2006; 117(5/S1): S315 - S319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. S. Biermann, G. J. Golladay, and R. N. Peterson Using the internet to enhance physician-patient communication. J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., March 1, 2006; 14(3): 136 - 144. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Kind E-mail and Parent/Physician Communication AAP Grand Rounds, September 1, 2005; 14(3): 34 - 34. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. D. Goldman Community Physicians' Attitudes Toward Electronic Follow-up After an Emergency Department Visit Clinical Pediatrics, May 1, 2005; 44(4): 305 - 309. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. G. Anand, M. J. Feldman, D. S. Geller, A. Bisbee, and H. Bauchner A Content Analysis of E-mail Communication Between Primary Care Providers and Parents Pediatrics, May 1, 2005; 115(5): 1283 - 1288. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. V. Slack A 67-Year-Old Man Who e-Mails His Physician JAMA, November 10, 2004; 292(18): 2255 - 2261. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Hassol, J. M. Walker, D. Kidder, K. Rokita, D. Young, S. Pierdon, D. Deitz, S. Kuck, and E. Ortiz Patient Experiences and Attitudes about Access to a Patient Electronic Health Care Record and Linked Web Messaging J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., November 1, 2004; 11(6): 505 - 513. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Car and A. Sheikh Email consultations in health care: 2--acceptability and safe application BMJ, August 21, 2004; 329(7463): 439 - 442. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. S. Gerstle and and Task Force on Medical Informatics E-mail Communication Between Pediatricians and Their Patients Pediatrics, July 1, 2004; 114(1): 317 - 321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. L. Wade Commentary: Computer-Based Interventions in Pediatric Psychology J. Pediatr. Psychol., June 1, 2004; 29(4): 269 - 272. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. J. Stille, W. A. Primack, and J. A. Savageau Generalist-Subspecialist Communication for Children With Chronic Conditions: A Regional Physician Survey Pediatrics, December 1, 2003; 112(6): 1314 - 1320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. J. Baraff, S. P. Wall, T. J. Lee, and J. Guzy Use of the Internet and E-Mail for Medical Advice and Information by Parents of a University Pediatric Faculty Practice Clinical Pediatrics, July 1, 2003; 42(6): 557 - 560. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. M. Liederman and C. S. Morefield Web Messaging: A New Tool for Patient-Physician Communication J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., May 1, 2003; 10(3): 260 - 270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. McMahon, M. Iwamoto, M. S. Massoudi, H. R. Yusuf, J. M. Stevenson, F. David, S. Y. Chu, and L. K. Pickering Comparison of E-mail, Fax, and Postal Surveys of Pediatricians Pediatrics, April 1, 2003; 111(4): e299 - 303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Bauchner, W. Adams, and H. Burstin "You've Got Mail": Issues in Communicating With Patients and Their Families by E-Mail Pediatrics, May 1, 2002; 109(5): 954 - 956. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
