Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T23:43:32.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality of psychiatric discharge summaries: a service evaluation following the introduction of an electronic discharge summary system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2015

M. Abbas ,
T. Ward ,
M. H. Peivandi ,
E. McKenzie ,
K. Kujawska-Debiec  and
A. Hills
M. Abbas*
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
T. Ward
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
M. H. Peivandi
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
E. McKenzie
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
K. Kujawska-Debiec
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
A. Hills
Affiliation:
Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
*
*Address for correspondence: M. Abbas, Consultant Psychiatrist, Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bradgate Unit, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9EJ, UK. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

There has been a recent move in psychiatry towards the use of electronic discharge (e-discharge) summaries in an effort to improve the efficiency of communication between primary and secondary care, but there are little data on how this affects the quality of information exchanged.

Objective

To evaluate the quality of psychiatric discharge summaries before and after the introduction of the e-discharge summary system.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 50 dictated discharge summaries from 1 January to 1 July 2010 and of 50 e-discharge summaries from 1 January to 1 July 2012, evaluating for the inclusion of 15 key items of clinical information.

Results

The average total score of the dictated summaries (mean=9.5, s.d.=2.0) was significantly higher (p<0.001) than the e-discharge summaries (mean=6.7, s.d.=1.8). There were statistically significant differences in five of the standards: findings of physical examination (p<0.001), ICD-10 code (p<0.001), forensic history (p<0.001), alcohol history (p<0.001) and drug history (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Our results revealed a decline in the quality of discharge summaries following the introduction of an electronic system. The reasons for this are unclear and require further analysis. Specific suggestions will depend on the local need, but include improvements in software design and layout as well as better education and training.

Keywords

Communicationdictated discharge summarydischarge summarydischargeelectronic discharge summary
Type
Short Report
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 327 - 330
Copyright
© College of Psychiatrists of Ireland 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Black, AD, Car, J, Pagliari, C, Anandan, C, Cresswell, K, Bokun, T, Sheikh, A (2011). The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview. PLoS Medicine 8, http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/the-impact-of-ehealth-on-the-quality-and-safety-of-health-care(bf0dd022-911e-44a1-9e8d-c09fa5704890)/export.htmlCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boonstra, A, Broekhuis, M (2010). Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Services Research 10, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, KP, Compton, W, Stinson, FS, Grant, BF (2006). Lifetime comorbidity of DSM-IV mood and anxiety disorders and specific drug use disorders: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 67, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crossan, I, Curtis, D, Ong, Y (2004). Audit of psychiatric discharge summaries: completing the cycle. Psychiatric Bulletin 28, 329–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, DR, Macias, C, Barreira, PJ, Fisher, WH, Hargreaves, WA, Harding, CM (2004). Prevalence, severity, and co-occurrence of chronic physical health problems of persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services (Washington, D.C.) 55, 1250–1257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maslove, DM, Leiter, RE, Griesman, J, Arnott, C, Mourad, O, Chow, CM, Bell, CM (2009). Electronic versus dictated hospital discharge summaries: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of General Internal Medicine 24, 995–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Leary, KJ, Liebovitz, DM, Feinglass, J, Liss, DT, Evans, DB, Kulkarni, N, Baker, DW (2009). Creating a better discharge summary: improvement in quality and timeliness using an electronic discharge summary. Journal of Hospital Medicine: An Official Publication of the Society of Hospital Medicine 4, 219–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scullard, P, Iqbal, N, White, L, Olla, E, Thomson, GA (2007). Improved communication between hospital and general practice using online patient discharge summaries. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 13, 56–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar