Article

Hospital discharge information after elective total hip or knee joint replacement surgery: A clinical audit of preferences among general practitioners.

Department of Health, Government of Western Australia
Australasian Medical Journal 01/2012; 5(10):544-50. DOI: 10.4066/AMJ.2012.1471
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The demand for elective joint replacement (EJR) surgery for degenerative joint disease continues to rise in Australia, and relative to earlier practices, patients are discharged back to the care of their general practitioner (GP) and other community-based providers after a shorter hospital stay and potentially greater post-operative acuity. In order to coordinate safe and effective post-operative care, GPs rely on accurate, timely and clinically-informative information from hospitals when their patients are discharged. The aim of this project was to undertake an audit with GPs regarding their preferences about the components of information provided in discharge summaries for patients undergoing EJR surgery for the hip or knee.GPs in a defined catchment area were invited to respond to an online audit instrument, developed by an interdisciplinary group of clinicians with knowledge of orthopaedic surgery practices. The 15-item instrument required respondents to rank the importance of components of discharge information developed by the clinician working group, using a three-point rating scale.Fifty-three GPs and nine GP registrars responded to the audit invitation (11.0% response rate). All discharge information options were ranked as 'essential' by a proportion of respondents, ranging from 14.8-88.5%. Essential information requested by the respondents included early post-operative actions required by the GP, medications prescribed, post-operative complications encountered and noting of any allergies. Non-essential information related to the prosthesis used. The provision of clinical guidelines was largely rated as 'useful' information (47.5-56.7%).GPs require a range of clinical information to safely and effectively care for their patients after discharge from hospital for EJR surgery. Implementation of changes to processes used to create discharge summaries will require engagement and collaboration between clinical staff, hospital administrators and information technology staff, supported in parallel by education provided to junior medical staff.

Full-text

Available from: Andrew M Briggs, Jun 14, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
88 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The clinical discharge summary remains a critical, but often poorly implemented tool in communication with primary care. An area of concern is the documentation of medication lists and appropriate follow up of medication changes.AimsTo assesses the accuracy of documentation of medication changes and expectations with regard to follow up from an acute assessment unit (AAU) of a tertiary metropolitan hospital.Methods All patients who were admitted and discharged directly from the unit during the month of June 2013 were audited. For all admissions, discharge summaries were audited for medication errors and for the appropriate documentation of indications and follow up for prescribed medications. All medications prescribed on discharge were collated using the World Health Organization Anatomical, Therapeutic and Chemical (ATC) classification.ResultsIn total, 219 admissions were analysed. There were 204 out of 219 (93.1%) discharge summaries that had an accurate medication list. Of 219 (74%) patients, 163 had at least one change to their medications during admission. Of 163 discharge summaries, 82 (50%) contained information regarding their indication and outpatient management. The most commonly prescribed classes along with the rates of indication and follow up documentation were anti-infectives (62%), gastrointestinal (51%), cardiovascular (50%) and central nervous system (44%).Conclusion Although there were fewer documentation errors in discharge summaries than previously described in the literature, concerns regarding the documentation of medication indication and follow up remain.
    Internal Medicine Journal 11/2014; 44(11). DOI:10.1111/imj.12581 · 1.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To determine how the timing and length of hospital discharge letters impact on the number of ongoing patient problems identified by general practitioners (GPs). Trial design: GPs were randomised into four groups. Each viewed a video monologue of an actor-patient as he might present to his GP following a hospital admission with 10 problems. GPs were provided with a medical record as well as a long or short discharge letter, which was available when the video was viewed or 1 week later. GPs indicated if they would prescribe, refer or order tests for the patient's problems. Methods: Setting Primary care. Participants Practising Australian GPs. Intervention A short or long hospital discharge letter enumerating patient problems. Outcome measure Number of ongoing patient problems out of 10 identified for management by the GPs. Randomisation 1:1 randomisation. Blinding (masking) Single-blind. Results: Numbers randomised 59 GPs. Recruitment GPs were recruited from a network of 102 GPs across Australia. Numbers analysed 59 GPs. Outcome GPs who received the long letter immediately were more satisfied with this information (p<0.001). Those who received the letter immediately identified significantly more health problems (p=0.001). GPs who received a short, delayed discharge letter were less satisfied than those who received a longer delayed letter (p=0.03); however, both groups who received the delayed letter identified a similar number of health problems. GPs who were older, who practised in an inner regional area or who offered more patient sessions per week identified fewer health problems (p values <0.01, <0.05 and <0.05, respectively). Harms Nil. Conclusions: Receiving information during patient consultation, as well as GP characteristics, influences the number of patient problems addressed.
    BMJ Open 07/2014; 4(7):e005475. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005475 · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background While translation of evidence into health policy and practice is recognised as critical to optimising health system performance and health-related outcomes for consumers, mechanisms to effectively achieve these goals are neither well understood, nor widely communicated. Health Networks represent a framework which offers a possible solution to this dilemma, particularly in light of emerging evidence regarding the importance of establishing relationships between stakeholders and identifying clinical leaders to drive evidence integration and translation into policy. This is particularly important for service delivery related to chronic diseases. In Western Australia (WA), disease and population-specific Health Networks are comprised of cross-discipline stakeholders who work collaboratively to develop evidence-informed policies and drive their implementation. Since establishment of the Health Networks in WA, over 50 evidence-informed Models of Care (MoCs) have been produced across 18 condition or population-focused Networks. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the Health Network framework in facilitating the translation of evidence into policy and practice with a particular focus on musculoskeletal health. Case presentation A review of activities of the WA Musculoskeletal Health Network was undertaken, focussing on outcomes and the processes used to achieve them in the context of: development of policy, procurement of funding, stakeholder engagement, publications, and projects undertaken by the Network which aligned to implementation of MoCs. The Musculoskeletal Health Network has developed four MoCs which reflect Australian National Health Priority Areas. Establishment of community-based services for consumers with musculoskeletal health conditions is a key recommendation from these MoCs. Through mapping barriers and enablers to policy implementation, working groups, led by local clinical leaders and supported by the broader Network and government officers, have undertaken a range of integrated projects, such as the establishment of a community-based, multidisciplinary rheumatology service. The success of these projects has been contingent on developing relationships between key stakeholders across the health system. Conclusions In WA, Networks have provided a sustainable mechanism to meaningfully engage consumers, carers, clinicians and other stakeholders; provided a forum to exchange ideas, information and evidence; and collaboratively plan and deliver evidence-based and contextually-appropriate health system improvements for consumers.
    BMC Health Services Research 11/2012; 12(1):394. DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-12-394 · 1.66 Impact Factor