S F Murphy1, L Lenihan2, F Orefuwa2, G Colohan3, I Hynes4, C G Collins2,5. 1. Department of Surgery, Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, Ireland. stephenmurphy@rcsi.ie. 2. Department of Surgery, Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, Ireland. 3. Department of Pharmacy, Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, Ireland. 4. Hospital Inpatient Enquiry (HIPE) Department, Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway, Ireland. 5. Department of Surgery, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The discharge letter is a key component of the communication pathway between the hospital and primary care. Accuracy and timeliness of delivery are crucial to ensure continuity of patient care. Electronic discharge summaries (EDS) and prescriptions have been shown to improve quality of discharge information for general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a new EDS on GP satisfaction levels and accuracy of discharge diagnosis. METHODS: A GP survey was carried out whereby semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 GPs from three primary care centres who receive a high volume of discharge letters from the hospital. A chart review was carried out on 90 charts to compare accuracy of ICD-10 coding of Non-Consultant Hospital Doctors (NCHDs) with that of trained Hopital In-Patient Enquiry (HIPE) coders. RESULTS: GP satisfaction levels were over 90 % with most aspects of the EDS, including amount of information (97 %), accuracy (95 %), GP information and follow-up (97 %) and medications (91 %). 70 % of GPs received the EDS within 2 weeks. ICD-10 coding of discharge diagnosis by NCHDs had an accuracy of 33 %, compared with 95.6 % when done by trained coders (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: The introduction of the EDS and prescription has led to improved quality of timeliness of communication with primary care. It has led to a very high satisfaction rating with GPs. ICD-10 coding was found to be grossly inaccurate when carried out by NCHDs and it is more appropriate for this task to be carried out by trained coders.
BACKGROUND: The discharge letter is a key component of the communication pathway between the hospital and primary care. Accuracy and timeliness of delivery are crucial to ensure continuity of patient care. Electronic discharge summaries (EDS) and prescriptions have been shown to improve quality of discharge information for general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a new EDS on GP satisfaction levels and accuracy of discharge diagnosis. METHODS: A GP survey was carried out whereby semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 GPs from three primary care centres who receive a high volume of discharge letters from the hospital. A chart review was carried out on 90 charts to compare accuracy of ICD-10 coding of Non-Consultant Hospital Doctors (NCHDs) with that of trained Hopital In-Patient Enquiry (HIPE) coders. RESULTS: GP satisfaction levels were over 90 % with most aspects of the EDS, including amount of information (97 %), accuracy (95 %), GP information and follow-up (97 %) and medications (91 %). 70 % of GPs received the EDS within 2 weeks. ICD-10 coding of discharge diagnosis by NCHDs had an accuracy of 33 %, compared with 95.6 % when done by trained coders (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: The introduction of the EDS and prescription has led to improved quality of timeliness of communication with primary care. It has led to a very high satisfaction rating with GPs. ICD-10 coding was found to be grossly inaccurate when carried out by NCHDs and it is more appropriate for this task to be carried out by trained coders.
Entities:
Keywords:
Continuity of care; Discharge letter; GP satisfaction; Patient safety
Authors: Richard Hillestad; James Bigelow; Anthony Bower; Federico Girosi; Robin Meili; Richard Scoville; Roger Taylor Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2005 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Sunil Kripalani; Frank LeFevre; Christopher O Phillips; Mark V Williams; Preetha Basaviah; David W Baker Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kevin J O'Leary; David M Liebovitz; Joseph Feinglass; David T Liss; Daniel B Evans; Nita Kulkarni; Matthew P Landler; David W Baker Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Nikoletta Zeschick; Julia Gollnick; Julia Muth; Franziska Hörbrand; Peter Killian; Wolfgang Krombholz; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff; Thomas Kühlein; Maria Sebastião Journal: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 1.595