A survey of patient–provider e-mail communication: what do patients think?
Abstract
Communication between patients and providers forms the backbone of the patient-provider relationship. Often such communication is strained due to time and space limitations on the part of both patients and providers. Many healthcare organizations are developing secure e-mail communication facilities to allow patients to exchange e-mail messages with their providers. Providers are worried that opening such lines of communication will inundate them with vast quantities of e-mail from their patients. Patients are worried that their messages will be intercepted and read by unauthorized people. In an attempt to determine how a group of internet-active, e-mail-ready patients currently use, or potentially view, the ability to exchange e-mail messages with their health care providers, we distributed a survey via e-mail to over 9500 patients. After determining each patient's e-mail activity level (based on the number of messages sent each day), we asked questions such as: "Have you ever sent e-mail to your provider?" "What issues or concerns have prevented you from sending e-mail messages to your provider?" "If your provider were to tell you that someone in his/her office may screen, read or perhaps reply to your message before he/she sees it, to what extent would you be concerned about this?" and "How would you rate your overall satisfaction with the use of e-mail to communicate with your provider?" Results from the survey indicate that nearly 85% of the patients surveyed send at least one e-mail message per day, but that very few (i.e. 6%) of the patients have actually sent an e-mail message to their provider. Interestingly, over half of the patients indicated that they would like to send their providers e-mail, but that they do not know their provider's e-mail address.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Overall patient desire to communicate with their physicians electronically is high.
“Although overall patient desire to communicate with their physicians electronically is high,60”
From Reducing Diagnostic Errors through Effective Communication: Harnessing the Power of Information Technology (2008) · cites this paper as [60]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 6 · Cited by 93
- Authors
- Sittig, D. F., King, S., & Hazlehurst, B. L.
- Corresponding author
- Sittig, Dean F.
- Venue
- International Journal of Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2001-04
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-80
- ISSN
- 1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021581506
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 26.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Keywords
- patient-provider communication, email communication, patient satisfaction, email security, patient-provider relationship
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Physician-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Chi-Square Distribution, Patient Satisfaction, Internet
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review