The intention of a PHR is to provide a complete and accurate summary of an individual's medical history which is accessible online.
"[3] The term "PHR" may be applied to both paper-based and computerized systems;[4] usage in the late 2010s usually implies an electronic application used to collect and store health data.
PHRs may also include information that is entered by consumers themselves, as well as data from other sources such as pharmacies, labs, and care providers.
Upon encountering a medical condition, a patient can better access test results, communicate with their doctors, and share information with others suffering similarly.
This may help clinicians make better treatment decisions by providing more continuous data,[1] resulting in improved efficiency in care.
[12] However, some physicians may have concerns about patient-entered information and its accuracy, as well as whether the added patient engagement creates more reimbursable work.
However, in 2017, Roehrs et al. performed a systematic literature review of PHRs and were able to divide architecture types into two groups: model-based and coverage-based.
Model architectures represent more traditional takes on PHRs, including health data that is still stored on paper.
Likewise, stand-alone, provider-tethered, and payer-tethered PHRs have different advantages and disadvantages for patients related to their individual circumstances.
Printed laboratory reports, copies of clinic notes, and health histories created by the individual may be parts of a paper-based PHR.
Probably the most successful paper PHR is the hand-held pregnancy record, developed in Milton Keynes in the mid-1980s[16] and now in use throughout the United Kingdom.
However, Fawdry et al. have shown that paper records are extremely flexible and do have distinct advantages over rigid electronic systems.
The health history compiled in computer based software can be printed, copied, and shared with anyone with a compatible word processor.
Some PHR products allow the copying of health records to a mass-storage device such as a CD-ROM, DVD, smart card,[21] or USB flash drive.
These web-based applications allow users to directly enter their information such as diagnosis, medications, laboratory tests, immunizations and other data associated with their health.
It found that most people did not keep record of minute details of their healthcare experiences and therefore made it difficult to get full value from web-based PHRs.
[36] A 2010–11 set of interviews of clinicians and patients found "that both usability concerns and socio-cultural influences are barriers to PHR adoption and use.
"[37] More recent studies and reviews in the mid- to late 2010s have revealed other issues such as privacy and confidentiality concerns, lack of motivation, low health literacy, health- and disease-related disabilities, and even administrative burdens.
[11][12][35] Additionally, how the PHR is promoted by healthcare organizations, how useful their features are, and how well the care provider uses it, particularly in the realm of patient communication, can influence adoption and usage rates.
[39] One of the most controversial issues for PHRs is how the technology could threaten the privacy of patient's protected health information (PHI).
This includes fertility, surgical procedures, emotional and psychological disorders, and diseases, which many patients are reluctant to share even voluntarily.
On the technological side, failures occur at numerous points: The state of PHR regulations are also worth mentioning.
"[7] With further questions arising about the security and privacy of PHI that makes its ways to expanding platforms such as smartphones and associated applications,[51] clearer regulations and policies will likely be required.
[42][55] However, caveats about retaining control of how the information is presented and used remain strong among respondents,[42][55] with concerns about anonymity, government insensitivity, and discrimination.