Review of electronic discharge summaries from the general medicine, general surgery and mental health streams at a tertiary hospital: retrospective analysis of timeliness, brevity and completeness
Keith Potent A E , Benjamin Levy B and Andrew Porritt C DA School of Medicine, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Southport, Qld 4215, Australia.
B Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Hospital Avenue, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia. Email: bj_levy@hotmail.com
C School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame Australia (Fremantle), 38/40 Henry Street, Fremantle, WA 6160, Australia.
D Present address: Royal Perth Hospital, 197 Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000, Australia. Email: andrew_porritt@hotmail.com
E Corresponding author. Email: k.potent@griffith.edu.au
Australian Health Review 44(5) 699-705 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH19057
Submitted: 5 March 2019 Accepted: 10 February 2020 Published: 23 September 2020
Abstract
Objective This retrospective study identified and compared the performance of electronic discharge summaries (EDSs) from three hospital in-patient streams (surgical, medical and mental health) with Australian standards.
Methods An audit was performed of 120 EDSs extracted from a tertiary hospital. Auditors evaluated each EDS using an adaptation of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care’s EDS toolkit.
Results EDSs from all in-patient streams were lengthy and most did not include information regarding discharge destination, patient education or recommendations. General Medicine EDSs were most timely, averaging within 1 day of discharge.
Conclusions Key areas of improvement remain for improving the timeliness, brevity and completeness of EDSs. Key areas identified for improvement include page length, discharge destination, alerts, patient education and recommendations. Variability in audit results between streams suggests the need for speciality-specific templates, standards and medical officer training.
What is known about the topic? The literature suggests that an EDS is timely if it is completed within 2 days of discharge. A complete and brief EDS should also include key details of the care in two (or fewer) pages.
What does this paper add? This paper evaluated 120 EDSs, compared them against a standard and stratified the EDSs according to three core clinical in-patient streams that produced them (surgical, medical and mental health).
What are the implications for practitioners? Although broad guidelines for timeliness, brevity and completeness have been established for EDSs, each in-patient stream will require different standards. A hospital or health service should have established standards relevant to each in-patient stream. Before commencing a term in any of the three in-patient streams, medical officers who are to generate EDSs should be trained in the required standard. Training should highlight critical elements of a speciality stream to ensure EDS authors are aware of the nuances of the stream in which they are rotating. In addition, general practitioners should liaise with local hospitals to ensure ongoing dialogue and improvement of clinical handover documents.
References
[1] Carayon P, Wood KE. Patient safety – the role of human factors and systems engineering. Stud Health Technol Inform 2010; 153 23–46.| 20543237PubMed |
[2] Jorm CM, White S, Kaneen T. Clinical handover: critical communications. Med J Aust 2009; 190 S108–9.
| Clinical handover: critical communications.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19485856PubMed |
[3] Belleli E, Naccarella L, Pirotta M. Communication at the interface between hospitals and primary care: a general practice audit of hospital discharge summaries. Aust Fam Physician 2013; 42 886–90.
| 24324993PubMed |
[4] Maslove DM, Leiter RE, Griesman J, Arnott C, Mourad O, Chow C, Bell C. Electronic versus dictated hospital discharge summaries: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24 995–1001.
| Electronic versus dictated hospital discharge summaries: a randomized controlled trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19609623PubMed |
[5] van Walraven C, Rokosh E. What is necessary for high-quality discharge summaries? Am J Med Qual 1999; 14 160–9.
| What is necessary for high-quality discharge summaries?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10452133PubMed |
[6] Silvester BV, Carr SJ. A shared electronic health record: lessons from the coalface. Med J Aust 2009; 190 S113–16.
| A shared electronic health record: lessons from the coalface.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19485857PubMed |
[7] Penfold R, Britton Z, Ng A, Rolph G. Identifying patients with cognitive impairment at a district general hospital for community follow-up: audit of discharge summaries and handover with educational intervention. Age Ageing 2018; 47 ii25–39.
| Identifying patients with cognitive impairment at a district general hospital for community follow-up: audit of discharge summaries and handover with educational intervention.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[8] Forster AJ, Murff HJ, Peterson JF, Gandhi TK, Bates DW. The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138 161–7.
| The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12558354PubMed |
[9] Callen JL, Alderton M, McIntosh J. Evaluation of electronic discharge summaries: a comparison of documentation in electronic and handwritten discharge summaries. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 613–20.
| Evaluation of electronic discharge summaries: a comparison of documentation in electronic and handwritten discharge summaries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18294904PubMed |
[10] Motamedi SM, Posadas-Calleja J, Straus S, Bates DW, Lorenzetti DL, Baylis B, Gilmour J, Kimpton S, Ghali W. The efficacy of computer-enabled discharge communication interventions: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2011; 20 403–15.
| The efficacy of computer-enabled discharge communication interventions: a systematic review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21262793PubMed |
[11] Mahfouz C, Bonney A, Mullan J, Rich W. An Australian discharge summary quality assessment tool: a pilot study. Aust Fam Physician 2017; 46 57–63.
| 28189135PubMed |
[12] Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). Electronic discharge summary systems self-evaluation toolkit. Sydney: ACSQHC; 2011.
[13] Li JY, Yong TY, Hakendorf P, Ben-Tovim D, Thompson CH. Timeliness in discharge summary dissemination is associated with patients’ clinical outcomes. J Eval Clin Pract 2013; 19 76–9.
| Timeliness in discharge summary dissemination is associated with patients’ clinical outcomes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21999337PubMed |
[14] Kripalani S, LeFevre F, Phillips CO, Williams MV, Basaviah P, Baker DW. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians. JAMA 2007; 297 831–41.
| Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17327525PubMed |
[15] Wilson S, Ruscoe W, Chapman M, Miller R. General practitioner–hospital communications: a review of discharge summaries. J Qual Clin Pract 2001; 21 104–8.
| General practitioner–hospital communications: a review of discharge summaries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11856404PubMed |
[16] Ahmed U, Carmody E. Improving transfer from secondary to primary care: an audit of discharge letters from psychiatric outpatient clinic. Eur Psychiatry 2011; 26 896. [Abstract]
[17] Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). National guidelines for on-screen presentation of discharge summaries. Sydney: ACSQHC; 2017.
[18] Garg D, Singhal A, Neelam K. Clinical audits by trainee doctors: obstacles and solutions. Clin Gov 2012; 17 45–53.
| Clinical audits by trainee doctors: obstacles and solutions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[19] Reid DB, Parsons SR, Gill SD, Hughes AJ. Discharge communication from inpatient care: an audit of written medical discharge summary procedure against the new National Health Service Standard for clinical handover. Aust Health Rev 2015; 39 197–201.
| Discharge communication from inpatient care: an audit of written medical discharge summary procedure against the new National Health Service Standard for clinical handover.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25494034PubMed |
[20] Vickery AW, Massarotto A, Fitzgerald A, Tarala R. Training intervention for intern discharge summaries. [TrIFIDS]. In: Proceedings of the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE); 4–8 September 2010; Glasgow, UK. Glasgow: AMEE; 2010. pp. 105.
