Stephanie K Mueller1, Kyla Giannelli2, Robert Boxer2, Jeffrey L Schnipper2. 1. BWH Hospitalist Service and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA BWH Hospitalist Service and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA smueller1@partners.org. 2. BWH Hospitalist Service and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA BWH Hospitalist Service and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Low health literacy is common, leading to patient vulnerability during hospital discharge, when patients rely on written health instructions. We aimed to examine the impact of the use of electronic, patient-friendly, templated discharge instructions on the readability of discharge instructions provided to patients at discharge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 233 patients discharged from a large tertiary care hospital to their homes following the implementation of a web-based "discharge module," which included the optional use of diagnosis-specific templated discharge instructions. We compared the readability of discharge instructions, as measured by the Flesch Reading Ease Level test (FREL, on a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating greater readability) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level test (FKGL, measured in grade levels), between discharges that used templated instructions (with or without modification) versus discharges that used clinician-generated instructions (with or without available templated instructions for the specific discharge diagnosis). RESULTS: Templated discharge instructions were provided to patients in 45% of discharges. Of the 55% of patients that received clinician-generated discharge instructions, the majority (78.1%) had no available templated instruction for the specific discharge diagnosis. Templated discharge instructions had higher FREL scores (71 vs. 57, P < .001) and lower FKGL scores (5.6 vs. 7.6, P < .001), compared to clinician-generated discharge instructions. DISCUSSION: The use of electronically available templated discharge instructions was associated with better readability (a higher FREL score and a lower FKGL score) than the use of clinician-generated discharge instructions. The main reason for clinicians to create discharge instructions was the lack of available templates for the patient's specific discharge diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Use of electronically available templated discharge instructions may be a viable option to improve the readability of written material provided to patients at discharge, although the library of available templates requires expansion.
OBJECTIVE: Low health literacy is common, leading to patient vulnerability during hospital discharge, when patients rely on written health instructions. We aimed to examine the impact of the use of electronic, patient-friendly, templated discharge instructions on the readability of discharge instructions provided to patients at discharge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 233 patients discharged from a large tertiary care hospital to their homes following the implementation of a web-based "discharge module," which included the optional use of diagnosis-specific templated discharge instructions. We compared the readability of discharge instructions, as measured by the Flesch Reading Ease Level test (FREL, on a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating greater readability) and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level test (FKGL, measured in grade levels), between discharges that used templated instructions (with or without modification) versus discharges that used clinician-generated instructions (with or without available templated instructions for the specific discharge diagnosis). RESULTS: Templated discharge instructions were provided to patients in 45% of discharges. Of the 55% of patients that received clinician-generated discharge instructions, the majority (78.1%) had no available templated instruction for the specific discharge diagnosis. Templated discharge instructions had higher FREL scores (71 vs. 57, P < .001) and lower FKGL scores (5.6 vs. 7.6, P < .001), compared to clinician-generated discharge instructions. DISCUSSION: The use of electronically available templated discharge instructions was associated with better readability (a higher FREL score and a lower FKGL score) than the use of clinician-generated discharge instructions. The main reason for clinicians to create discharge instructions was the lack of available templates for the patient's specific discharge diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Use of electronically available templated discharge instructions may be a viable option to improve the readability of written material provided to patients at discharge, although the library of available templates requires expansion.
Authors: Aaron M Yengo-Kahn; Natalie Hibshman; Michael Bezzerides; Michael J Feldman; Adam A Vukovic; Nishit Mummareddy; Shilin Zhao; Cody H Penrod; Christopher M Bonfield; E Haley Vance Journal: Pediatr Qual Saf Date: 2021-08-26
Authors: Sarah Doyle; Rebecca Pavlos; Samantha J Carlson; Katherine Barton; Mejbah Bhuiyan; Bernadett Boeing; Meredith L Borland; Steven Hoober; Christopher C Blyth Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2022-01-17
Authors: Patrizio Zanobini; Chiara Lorini; Alberto Baldasseroni; Claudia Dellisanti; Guglielmo Bonaccorsi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 3.390