Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Jul-Aug;21(4):742-50.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002141. Epub 2013 Nov 22.

Patient engagement in the inpatient setting: a systematic review

Jennifer E Prey  1 , Janet Woollen  1 , Lauren Wilcox  2 , Alexander D Sackeim  3 , George Hripcsak  1 , Suzanne Bakken  4 , Susan Restaino  5 , Steven Feiner  2 , David K Vawdrey  1
Affiliations
Review

Patient engagement in the inpatient setting: a systematic review

Jennifer E Prey et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review existing literature regarding patient engagement technologies used in the inpatient setting.

Methods: PubMed, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Digital Library, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Xplore, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies that discussed patient engagement ('self-efficacy', 'patient empowerment', 'patient activation', or 'patient engagement'), (2) involved health information technology ('technology', 'games', 'electronic health record', 'electronic medical record', or 'personal health record'), and (3) took place in the inpatient setting ('inpatient' or 'hospital'). Only English language studies were reviewed.

Results: 17 articles were identified describing the topic of inpatient patient engagement. A few articles identified design requirements for inpatient engagement technology. The remainder described interventions, which we grouped into five categories: entertainment, generic health information delivery, patient-specific information delivery, advanced communication tools, and personalized decision support.

Conclusions: Examination of the current literature shows there are considerable gaps in knowledge regarding patient engagement in the hospital setting and inconsistent use of terminology regarding patient engagement overall. Research on inpatient engagement technologies has been limited, especially concerning the impact on health outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Keywords: inpatient; patient engagement; systematic review; technology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flow diagram of search strategy to identify articles.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Categories of information technology-enabled patient engagement methods.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Tang PC, Lansky D. The missing link: bridging the patient-provider health information gap. Health Aff 2005;24:1290–5 - PubMed
    1. Bird AP, Walji MT. Our patients have access to their medical records. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;292:595–6 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cohen RN Whose file is it anyway? Discussion paper. J R Soc Med 1985;78:126–8 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fisher B, Britten N. Patient access to records: expectations of hospital doctors and experiences of cancer patients. J R Coll Gen Pract 1993;43:52–6 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jimison H, Sher P. Consumer health informatics: health information technology for consumers. J Am Soc Inf Sci 1995;46:783–90

Publication types