Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27872086›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2016

Intensive care discharge summaries for general practice staff: a focus group study.

Suzanne Bench, Jocelyn Cornish, Andreas Xyrichis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Suzanne BenchKing's College London, London.
Jocelyn CornishKing's College London, London.
Andreas XyrichisKing's College London, London.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding how patients and relatives can be supported after hospital discharge is a UK research priority. Intensive Care Unit (ICU) discharge summaries are a simple way of providing GPs with the information they require to coordinate ongoing care, but little evidence is available to guide best practice.

aimThis study aimed at better understanding the information needs of GP staff (GPs and practice nurses) supporting former patients of ICUs and their families following discharge from hospital, and identifying the barriers/facilitators associated with ICU-primary care information transfer. DESIGN AND

settingThis was a qualitative exploratory study of practices and participants throughout the UK.

methodAudiotaped focus group discussions, complemented by small-group/individual interviews, were conducted with 15 former patients of ICUs, four relatives, and 20 GP staff between June and September 2015. Demographic data were captured by questionnaire and qualitative data were thematically analysed.

resultsFindings suggest variability in discharge information experiences and blurred lines of responsibility between hospital and GP staff, and patients/relatives. Continuity of care was affected by delayed or poor communication from the hospital; GPs' limited contact with patients from critical care; and a lack of knowledge of the effects of critical illness or resources available to ameliorate these difficulties. Time pressures and information technology were, respectively, the most commonly mentioned barrier and facilitator.

conclusionEffective rehabilitation after a critical illness requires a coordinated and comprehensive approach, incorporating the provision of well-completed, timely, and relevant ICU-primary care discharge information. Health professionals need an improved understanding of critical illness, and patients and families must be included in all aspects of the information-sharing process.

Indexed as

Focus GroupsGeneral PracticePatient DischargeCommunicationContinuity of Patient CareCritical CareCritical IllnessFemaleGeneral PractitionersHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareSurveys and Questionnairescritical illnessgeneral practicepatient dischargequalitative researchrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID27872086
PMCPMC5198666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.