Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25587091›Full record

Trial reportCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2015

Hospital variation in quality of discharge summaries for patients hospitalized with heart failure exacerbation.

Mohammed Salim Al-Damluji, Kristina Dzara, Beth Hodshon, Natdanai Punnanithinont, Harlan M Krumholz, Sarwat I Chaudhry, Leora I Horwitz

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The diagnostic certainty levels of junior clinicians: A retrospective cohort study.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mohammed Salim Al-DamlujiFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Kristina DzaraFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Beth HodshonFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Natdanai PunnanithinontFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Harlan M KrumholzFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Sarwat I ChaudhryFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.).
Leora I HorwitzFrom the Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (M.S.A.-D., K.D., S.I.C.), Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (B.H., H.M.K.), and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine (H.M.K.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Medicine, Erie County Medical Center, Buffalo, NY (N.P.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT (H.M.K., S.I.C.); Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT (H.M.K.); Center for Healthcare Innovation and Delivery Science, New York University Langone Medical Center (L.I.H.); and Division of Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health and Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine (L.I.H.). leora.horwitz@nyumc.org.

Funding

Telemonitoring to improve heart failure outcomesR01HL080228 · NHLBI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KRUMHOLZ, HARLAN MARC · 2005 to 2008
$6.9M
Center for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research at Yale UniversityU01HL105270 · NHLBI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CURTIS, JEPTHA PELHAM, KRUMHOLZ, HARLAN MARC · 2010 to 2013
$5.8M
Heart Failure Readmissions in Older Adults: A Systems PerspectiveK08AG038336 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI HORWITZ, LEORA · 2010 to 2013
$648k
NHLBI NIH HHS 5 R01 HL080228NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL080228NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL105270NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL105270-05NIA NIH HHS K08 AG038336
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle-site studies have demonstrated inadequate quality of discharge summaries in timeliness, transmission, and content, potentially contributing to adverse outcomes. However, degree of hospital-level variation in discharge summary quality for patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) is uncertain. METHODS AND

resultsWe analyzed discharge summaries of patients enrolled in the Telemonitoring to Improve Heart Failure Outcomes (Tele-HF) study. We assessed hospital-level performance on timeliness (fraction of summaries completed on the day of discharge), documented transmission to the follow-up physician, and content (presence of components suggested by the Transitions of Care Consensus Conference). We obtained 1501 discharge summaries from 1640 (91.5%) patients discharged alive from 46 hospitals. Among hospitals contributing ≥ 10 summaries, the median hospital dictated 69.2% of discharge summaries on the day of discharge (range, 0.0%-98.0%; P<0.001); documented transmission of 33.3% of summaries to the follow-up physician (range, 0.0%-75.7%; P<0.001); and included 3.6 of 7 Transitions of Care Consensus Conference elements (range, 2.9-4.5; P<0.001). Hospital course was typically included (97.2%), but summaries were less likely to include discharge condition (30.7%), discharge volume status (16.0%), or discharge weight (15.7%). No discharge summary included all 7 Transitions of Care Consensus Conference-endorsed content elements, was dictated on the day of discharge, and was sent to a follow-up physician.

conclusionsEven at the highest performing hospital, discharge summary quality is insufficient in terms of timeliness, transmission, and content. Improvements in all aspects of discharge summary quality are necessary to enable the discharge summary to serve as an effective transitional care tool.

Indexed as

HospitalizationContinuity of Patient CareDisease ProgressionHealthcare DisparitiesHeart FailureHospitalsHumansInformation DisseminationPatient DischargePatient Discharge SummariesQuality Indicators, Health CareTelemedicineTime FactorsUnited Statesepidemiologyheart failurequality of healthcare

Identifiers

PMID25587091
PMCPMC4303507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.