Tampa General: Embedding Public Health Into the EHR Interface

Hospitals have long struggled to translate their clinical reach into broader public health impact. With the decision by Tampa General Hospital to enable organ donor registration directly through its MyChart interface, a new model is quietly taking shape, one that positions the electronic health record (EHR) not just as a data repository, but as a civic engagement tool. While subtle in execution, this integration could mark the beginning of a broader recalibration in how health systems activate digital tools for population-scale outcomes.

The stakes are not abstract. More than 100,000 individuals in the United States currently await lifesaving organ transplants, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing. Yet fewer than 60% of adults are formally registered donors, despite polling that indicates overwhelming public support. Historically, organ donor registration has been tethered to state-run processes, most commonly motor vehicle departments, systems not designed with health equity, clinical access, or digital interoperability in mind.

By embedding registration functionality into MyChart, TGH is removing friction from that process, and doing so in a venue where patient intent, medical context, and continuity of care converge. The move also raises deeper operational and ethical questions about how far EHR vendors and health systems should go in integrating public interest functions into patient portals.

Clinical Mission Meets Public Imperative

The clinical rationale is clear. Every added donor registration increases the likelihood of successful organ procurement and transplantation. But the decision to surface this function within a patient-facing EHR environment reveals more than just logistical convenience; it points to an emergent strategy where health systems are leveraging established platforms to close public health gaps.

From a workflow perspective, the integration relies on Epic Systems, whose MyChart product serves as a digital front door for millions of patients nationwide. According to Donate Life America, the new feature links registrants to the National Donate Life Registry, ensuring that their donor status is portable, secure, and independent of state lines. This interoperability matters in emergency scenarios when time-sensitive decisions must be made, and underscores the argument for placing high-impact civic options inside the same digital environments that support appointment scheduling, medication adherence, and results review.

More fundamentally, the initiative reflects a growing awareness among healthcare executives that patient portals are not just administrative tools. They are behavioral environments — spaces where the right prompt at the right time can reshape patient choices in lasting ways.

Regulatory and Ethical Edge Cases

Integrating organ donation consent into MyChart is legally permissible, but it surfaces key compliance and privacy considerations that other health systems must study closely before replication.

For instance, while the registration data is kept separate from the patient’s clinical record, a design decision meant to protect autonomy and avoid implicit bias, it still coexists within a shared digital space. As patient data becomes increasingly liquid across platforms, organizations must ensure airtight demarcation of consent artifacts and clinical content.

Moreover, the line between informed engagement and digital coercion can blur quickly. Health systems must weigh interface design choices carefully. The prominence, timing, and contextual framing of donation prompts could affect perception and participation, especially among vulnerable populations. The Office for Civil Rights has previously flagged digital nudge tactics as areas for future scrutiny, particularly when they intersect with consent.

And while donor registration serves a public good, any precedent that encourages hospitals to campaign for policy-aligned actions through EHRs demands rigorous governance. Today it’s organ donation. Tomorrow it could be voter registration, research participation, or public health surveillance. Clarity on the limits and ethical use cases of EHR-integrated activism is urgently needed.

Toward a Public Health-Integrated Interface

Despite these tensions, the upside of this model is hard to ignore. Embedding social good functions into clinical interfaces acknowledges the complexity of modern healthcare leadership, where responsibilities span not just patient care, but system-level contribution to population health.

Health systems already carry the burden of financial stewardship, workforce optimization, and regulatory compliance. Adding public health facilitation to the list is not mission creep — it’s a recalibration of tools long underutilized. According to a 2025 Health Affairs article on EHR design and equity, subtle shifts in digital interface architecture can measurably improve patient adherence, participation in screenings, and trust in health institutions.

As hospital margins tighten and technology investments come under scrutiny, systems like Tampa General are demonstrating that innovation need not hinge on new platforms or tools. Instead, it may come from intentional design within existing infrastructure, aligning operational efficiency with civic relevance.

The donor registration feature is likely only the beginning. Health systems already have access to validated platforms, robust patient engagement tools, and growing analytics capabilities. What’s been missing is the editorial eye: the strategic decision to use those tools not just to manage patient data, but to invite patient agency on issues of national consequence.

The challenge now is to ensure that such integrations are governed with discipline, evaluated for equity, and designed not merely for uptake, but for trust. TGH has thrown down a quiet but profound gauntlet. The question for other health systems is not whether they can replicate the functionality. It’s whether they are ready to accept the responsibility that comes with it.