%0期刊文章%@ 2368-7959 %I JMIR出版物%V 8% 卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析N 12% P e34170% T与受精神健康状况影响的人共享临床记录和电子健康记录:范围审查%A施瓦茨，朱利安%A Bärkås，安妮卡%A Blease，夏洛特%A Collins，洛娜%A Hägglund，玛丽亚%A Markham，萨拉%A Hochwarter，斯特凡%+精神病学和心理治疗系，伊曼纽尔·克林尼克Rüdersdorf，勃兰登堡医学院西奥多·方塔内，塞巴德82/83,Rüdersdorf, 15562，德国，49 17622652628，julian.schwarz@mhb-fontane.de %K电子健康记录%K打开笔记%K用户参与%K患者倡导%K患者门户%K患者权利%K协作医疗%K参与%K合作生产%K系统改造%K医疗改革%D 2021 %7 14.12.2021 %9回顾%J JMIR Ment health %G英文%X背景信息:电子健康记录(EHRs)在国际上越来越多地实施，而与服务用户(SUs)共享电子健康记录(EHRs)是一种相对较新的做法。对患者可访问电子病历(PAEHRs)的研究(通常被称为开放病历)在全科医学环境中显示了有希望的结果。然而，在精神卫生保健(MHC)环境下进行的研究强调了几个需要进一步探索的伦理和实践挑战。目的:本范围综述旨在绘制MHC中PAEHRs的现有证据。我们试图将发现与其他卫生背景下的研究联系起来，比较不同利益相关者的观点、期望、PAEHRs的实际经验，并确定潜在的研究差距。方法:采用6个电子数据库进行系统的范围评价。研究包括了截至2021年9月与受精神健康状况影响的人共享临床记录或电子病历的研究。 The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Extension for Scoping Reviews guided narrative synthesis and reporting of findings. Results: Of the 1034 papers screened, 31 were included in this review. The studies used mostly qualitative methods or surveys and were predominantly published after 2018 in the United States. PAEHRs were examined in outpatient (n=29) and inpatient settings (n=11), and a third of all research was conducted in Veterans Affairs Mental Health. Narrative synthesis allowed the integration of findings according to the different stakeholders. First, SUs reported mainly positive experiences with PAEHRs, such as increased trust in their clinician, health literacy, and empowerment. Negative experiences were related to inaccurate notes, disrespectful language use, or uncovering of undiscussed diagnoses. Second, for health care professionals, concerns outweigh the benefits of sharing EHRs, including an increased clinical burden owing to more documentation efforts and possible harm triggered by reading the notes. Third, care partners gained a better understanding of their family members’ mental problems and were able to better support them when they had access to their EHR. Finally, policy stakeholders and experts addressed ethical challenges and recommended the development of guidelines and trainings to better prepare both clinicians and SUs on how to write and read notes. Conclusions: PAEHRs in MHC may strengthen user involvement, patients’ autonomy, and shift medical treatment to a coproduced process. Acceptance issues among health care professionals align with the findings from general health settings. However, the corpus of evidence on digital sharing of EHRs with people affected by mental health conditions is limited. Above all, further research is needed to examine the clinical effectiveness, efficiency, and implementation of this sociotechnical intervention. %M 34904956 %R 10.2196/34170 %U https://mental.www.mybigtv.com/2021/12/e34170 %U https://doi.org/10.2196/34170 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34904956