Lack of Persistence of Certain Information. Beneficiaries observed that the wallet card did not save all previously-entered information. This necessitated that users re-enter some of the information each time they wanted to create a card. Beneficiaries found this to be inconvenient and would rather the PHR allowed them to simply edit the previously entered information.
Difficulty Understanding Medical Terms. Participants reported that MyPHRSC used some terminology that was not easily understandable. For instance, the use of terms such as “PCP” and “provider” were confusing. Additionally, participants did not understand the SNOMED and ICD codes which were included in the PHR.
Data Inaccuracies. Although the beneficiaries generally trusted the information in the PHR and believed the quality of the claims information provided to be satisfactory, some did express minor concerns regarding the accuracy of the claims information. It was noted that some of the information was inaccurate and that some claims data was missing. Some also questioned the quality of the data that was auto-populated in MyPHRSC due to clinicians and facilities occasionally being listed multiple times and some self-entered information not being retained.
Perceptions around Privacy and Security. In terms of privacy and security, most patients reported a willingness to share their information in a PHR if it would benefit their care. The beneficiaries did not have significant concerns regarding the integrity of their information in MyPHRSC, however, a few expressed serious concerns about health information being disclosed and used against them by insurance companies or the government.