Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29914879›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018

Processing of discharge summaries in general practice: a retrospective record review.

Rachel Ann Spencer, Simon Edward Frank Spencer, Sarah Rodgers, Stephen M Campbell, Anthony John Avery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. General practice follow-up after hospital discharge in older adults: retrospective record analysis in UK primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Safety issues in post-discharge care of older patients in general practice: an ethnographic study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Making hospital discharge safer for frail older patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rachel Ann SpencerNIHR career progression fellow, Division of Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham; Academic Primary Care and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research, and NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research (PSTR) Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Simon Edward Frank SpencerDepartment of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry.
Sarah RodgersDivision of Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham Medical School, Nottingham; NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Nottingham.
Stephen M CampbellNIHR Greater Manchester PSTRC; Division of Population Health, HSR and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Anthony John AveryDivision of Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham Medical School, Nottingham; NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Nottingham.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for greater understanding of the epidemiology of primary care patient safety in order to generate solutions to prevent future harm.

aimTo estimate the rate of failures in processing actions requested in hospital discharge summaries, and to determine factors associated with these failures. DESIGN AND

settingThe authors undertook a retrospective records review. The study population was emergency admissions for patients aged ≥75 years, drawn from 10 practices in three areas of England.

methodOne GP researcher reviewed the records for 300 patients after hospital discharge to determine the rate of compliance with actions requested in the discharge summary, and to estimate the rate of associated harm from non-compliance. In cases where GPs documented decision-making contrary to what was requested, these instances did not constitute failures. Data were also collected on time taken to process discharge communications.

resultsThere were failures in processing actions requested in 46% (112/246) of discharge summaries (95% confidence interval [CI] = 39 to 52%). Medications changes were not made in 17% (124/750) of requests (95% CI = 14 to 19%). Tests were not completed for 26% of requests (95% CI = 16 to 35%), and 27% of requested follow-ups were not arranged (95% CI = 20 to 33%). The harm rate associated with these failures was 8%. Increased risk of failure to process test requests was significantly associated with the type of clinical IT system, and male patients.

conclusionFailures occurred in the processing of requested actions in almost half of all discharge summaries, and with all types of action requested. Associated harms were uncommon and most were of moderate severity.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsGeneral PracticeAgedAged, 80 and overContinuity of Patient CareDocumentationEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMedical AuditPatient DischargePatient SafetyRetrospective Studiescare transitiongeneral practicepatient dischargepatient safety

Identifiers

PMID29914879
PMCPMC6058631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.