The document discusses the meaningful use of personal health records (PHRs) in the context of healthcare technology, emphasizing the need to define its usage amidst various stakeholders. It identifies barriers such as physician workload and privacy concerns, alongside facilitators like incentives for healthcare providers and patients. Suggestions for improving PHR utilization include implementing supportive policies, integrating genomic data, and enhancing patient engagement through technology.

1. Meaningful use of Personal Health Records Saeed Mehrabi PhD Student Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, School of Informatics Hadi Kharrazi Assistant Professor Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, School of Informatics AMA-IEEE Medical Technology Conference on Individualized Healthcare March 2010, Washington, D.C.

2. Introduction HITECH provision of ARRA requires to identify meaningful use of Health information technologies. Due to focus of ARRA’s HIT funding on EHR, the definition of meaningful use has been mainly conceptualized in that context. We are trying to define the meaningful use of PHR considering its involving stakeholders and implementation timelines. PHR: An electronic record of health-related information of an individual that conforms to nationally recognized interoperability standards and that can be drawn from multiple sources while being managed, shared, and controlled by an individual.

3. Barriers & Facilitators of PHR Barriers: Increased workload of physicians Health care providers’ confidence in accuracy of information entered by patients Computer literacy and computer anxiety Meeting patients’ technology expectations Reimbursement of physicians Privacy and security issues Facilitators: incentives for both healthcare providers and patients

4. MU of PHR considering its timeline Current Suggestions Improving health and decreasing cost by providing incentives to all stakeholders (e.g. tax credits) Implementing necessary policies and standards to facilitate integration of PHR among stakeholders (e.g. tethering with EHR) Offering patient oriented clinical decision support (e.g. alerting drug interactions or reminding patients to take their medication). Near-Future Suggestions Behavioral aspects and business models of PHR may increase its penetration among stakeholders.

5. Long-Term Suggestions Integrating personalized genomic information into PHR Implementing real-time mass statistical health analysis Encompassing customized health education strategies MU of PHR considering its timeline (cont.)

6. References Defining Key Health Information Technology Terms (2008). http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_10741_848133_0_0_18/10_2_hit_terms.pdf accessed Feb 2010 Earnest, M. A., Ross, E. R., Wittevrongel, L., Moore, L. A., & Lin, C. T. (2004). Use of a Patient-Accessible Electronic Medical Record in a Practice for Congestive Heart Failure: Patient and Physician Experiences. J Am Med Inform Assoc , 11 , 410–417. The Challenges and Opportunities for PHRs (2008). http://rwjfblogs.typepad.com/pioneer/ 2008/09/patti-brennan-t.html accessed Feb 2010 Recommendations from the MU Workgroup. (2009). http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_11113_872720_0_0_18/Meaningful%20Use%20Preamble.pdf