Kamakshya P Patra1, Nicholas Mains2, Crystal Dalton2, Jessica Welsh2, Chizite Iheonunekwu3, Zheng Dai4, Pamela J Murray2, Erin S Fisher5. 1. Department of Pediatrics and kapatra@hsc.wvu.edu. 2. Department of Pediatrics and. 3. West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, Lewisburg, West Virginia; and. 4. School of Public Health, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. 5. Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Diego and Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego, San Diego, California.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pediatric discharge from the inpatient setting is a complex, error-prone process. In this study, we evaluated the outcomes of using a standardized process for hospital discharge of pediatric patients. METHODS: A 1-year pre- and postintervention pilot study was designed to improve discharge transition of care. The bundle intervention, facilitated by advanced practice providers, included risk identification and intervention. Process and outcome metrics included patient satisfaction measures on the discharge domain (overall discharge, speed of discharge process, whether they felt ready for discharge), use of handouts, scheduling of follow-up appointments, and postdischarge phone call. RESULTS: Significant improvements were found in all aspects of patient satisfaction, including speed of the discharge process and instructions for discharge, discharge readiness, and the overall discharge process. Length of stay decreased significantly after intervention. The checklist identified ∼4% of discharges without a correct primary care physician. Significant differences were found for scheduled primary care appointment before discharge and patients receiving handouts. The bundle identified risks that may complicate transition of care in approximately half of the patients. Phone communication occurred with almost half of the patients after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of an evidence-based discharge checklist can improve processes, increase delivery of patient education, and improve patient and family perceptions of the discharge process. Involvement of key stakeholders, use of evidence-based interventions with local adaptation, and use of a consistent provider responsible for implementation can improve transitions of care.
OBJECTIVES: Pediatric discharge from the inpatient setting is a complex, error-prone process. In this study, we evaluated the outcomes of using a standardized process for hospital discharge of pediatric patients. METHODS: A 1-year pre- and postintervention pilot study was designed to improve discharge transition of care. The bundle intervention, facilitated by advanced practice providers, included risk identification and intervention. Process and outcome metrics included patient satisfaction measures on the discharge domain (overall discharge, speed of discharge process, whether they felt ready for discharge), use of handouts, scheduling of follow-up appointments, and postdischarge phone call. RESULTS: Significant improvements were found in all aspects of patient satisfaction, including speed of the discharge process and instructions for discharge, discharge readiness, and the overall discharge process. Length of stay decreased significantly after intervention. The checklist identified ∼4% of discharges without a correct primary care physician. Significant differences were found for scheduled primary care appointment before discharge and patients receiving handouts. The bundle identified risks that may complicate transition of care in approximately half of the patients. Phone communication occurred with almost half of the patients after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of an evidence-based discharge checklist can improve processes, increase delivery of patient education, and improve patient and family perceptions of the discharge process. Involvement of key stakeholders, use of evidence-based interventions with local adaptation, and use of a consistent provider responsible for implementation can improve transitions of care.
Authors: Alan J Forster; Heather D Clark; Alex Menard; Natalie Dupuis; Robert Chernish; Natasha Chandok; Asmat Khan; Carl van Walraven Journal: CMAJ Date: 2004-02-03 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Emma Coles; Mary Wells; Margaret Maxwell; Fiona M Harris; Julie Anderson; Nicola M Gray; Gill Milner; Stephen MacGillivray Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2017-08-23