RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To identify perceived benefits, problems, facilitators, and barriers to adolescent online patient portal use. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews with dyads of parents and adolescents with or without chronic illness. The study team purposively sampled for racial and ethnic minorities and fathers. Three team members then performed thematic analysis of the transcripts, with subsequent dyadic analysis of themes represented by related parents and adolescents. RESULTS: We performed 102 interviews with 51 dyads of parents and adolescents (26 with chronic illness, 25 without chronic illness). Nearly all participants believed that adolescents should be permitted portal access. We identified 4 themes related to portal benefits: improves adolescent's knowledge of health; supports medical self-management and autonomy; strengthens communication and relationships; and supports parental influence. We identified 4 themes related to portal problems: misunderstanding or confusion; emotional distress; strain on relationships; and irresponsible use of portal. Facilitators of portal use included severity of illness, adolescent's curiosity, and ease of technology use. Barriers included lack of awareness or interest, complexity of information, and access difficulties. Twenty adolescents (39%) did not know they could access the portal, and 23 (45%) lacked interest in portals. Parents and adolescents seldom used the portal as a collaborative tool, and instead were engaging with the portal independently. CONCLUSION: Parents and adolescents perceive several benefits and problems with portal use, but many adolescents lack interest in using portals. Adolescent portals represent an underutilized resource to engage adolescents in their care.
Assuntos
Pais , Portais do Paciente , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Humanos , Adolescente , Masculino , Feminino , Pais/psicologia , Adulto , Entrevistas como Assunto , Doença Crônica/psicologia , Relações Pais-FilhoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the current distribution, composition, and practice patterns of multidisciplinary vascular anomalies (VAs) teams in the US. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional survey of children's hospitals in the US offering VAs care. We approached 142 children's hospitals that provided care for VAs via email. The survey evaluated VA clinic location, medical staffing, research participation, and treatments offered. The survey was administered between October 2021 and July 2022. RESULTS: Participants from 95 eligible hospitals responded to the survey (response rate = 67%). Large areas of the Midwest and Northwest US had no available multidisciplinary VA teams or clinics. Most respondents worked at academic centers (89%), with 66% at a freestanding children's hospital, and 56% reported having a multidisciplinary clinic. Most common physician participants in clinic included hematology-oncology (91%), interventional radiology (87%), dermatology (85%), plastic surgery (81%), and otolaryngology (74%). Only 38% of programs included medical geneticists. Smaller hospitals had fewer medical and ancillary staff and offered fewer therapeutic options. Research was available at most larger institutions (69%) but less commonly at smaller hospitals (34%). CONCLUSIONS: Major portions of the US lack multidisciplinary VA care. Furthermore, VA programs vary in composition and geneticists are absent from the majority of programs. These findings should inform efforts to address disparate access and develop standards of care for multidisciplinary VA care in the US.