3Qs: Patients' access to doctors' notes examined

by Lauren Dibble
Law professor Michael Meltsner discusses the impact of a recent study that sought to determine the effect of allowing patients to review their doctors’ notes after a visit.

In a pilot study called Open­Notes, more than 100 primary-​​care physi­cians vol­un­teered to invite more than 20,000 patients to review their doc­tors' notes fol­lowing an office visit to deter­mine the effects of facil­i­tating that access. The results of the study, pub­lished in the Annals of Internal Med­i­cine in October, found that a majority of patients felt more in con­trol of their care, adhered to med­ica­tion pre­scrip­tions and wanted the program to continue.

We asked Michael Melt­sner, the George J. and Kath­leen Waters Matthews Dis­tin­guished Uni­ver­sity Pro­fessor in Northeastern's School of Law, who par­tic­i­pated in the study and wrote an accom­pa­nying edi­to­rial, to dis­cuss the study and issues of trans­parency around patients' med­ical records.

What information are patients legally entitled to? How easily accessible is this information?

Patients are legally enti­tled to their records but access to them is dif­fi­cult. Obsta­cles are put in their way by health­care per­sonnel, many of whom aren't used to sharing the records or knowing just where they can be located. All too often, patients give up the quest in frus­tra­tion. But there is now a growing national movement for doc­tors to open their notes to patients. Recent research con­cludes that fears patients will be con­fused by what they are told or that doc­tors will have to waste valu­able time writing and dis­cussing their notes are overblown.

Why are some doctors and medical professionals viewed as being resistant to full transparency? Does transparency put them at any legal risk?

I think it's less fear of lia­bility than a sense that patients won't know what to do with the infor­ma­tion that doc­tors often feel they are writing for other doc­tors, rather than the patient. There may also be anx­iety that the physi­cian will lose some con­trol and be sub­ject to nag­ging ques­tions about the treat­ment and the patient's med­ical his­tory. But patients over­whelm­ingly want to see these records when they are given the chance and once health­care providers realize this, arrange­ments that facil­i­tate sharing infor­ma­tion are inevitable.

How does full transparency and access to medical information benefit patients? Does the healthcare system as a whole benefit?

I tried to sum­ma­rize the com­pli­cated answers to these ques­tions in my October edi­to­rial in the Annals of Internal Med­i­cine, but my sum­mary response is that infor­ma­tion is usu­ally valu­able, espe­cially if you believe that indi­vid­uals have to play a role in their own devel­op­ment, care and treat­ment. , for example, often suffer selec­tive amnesia after dis­cussing serious issues at an office visit. Having a copy of the doctor's notes allows a ready check of what was said and rec­om­mended as well an oppor­tu­nity to con­sult over the details with family and friends.

More information: annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1363511

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

3Qs: Many questions remain in meningitis outbreak

Oct 18, 2012

In recent weeks, an out­break of fungal menin­gitis has infected more than 200 people and killed 15. The infec­tion was traced back to a steroidal injec­tion pre­pared at a com­pounding phar­macy based ...

A new kind of pub crawl

Aug 24, 2012

Web­sites like Face­book, LinkedIn and other social-​​media net­works con­tain mas­sive amounts of valu­able public infor­ma­tion. Auto­mated web tools called web crawlers sift through these ...

Recommended for you

Background TV can be bad for kids

5 hours ago

Parents, turn off the television when your children are with you. And when you do let them watch, make sure the programs stimulate their interest in learning.

User comments