Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32539716›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Adult patient perspectives on receiving hospital discharge letters: a corpus analysis of patient interviews.

Katharine Weetman, Jeremy Dale, Emma Scott, Stephanie Schnurr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Katharine WeetmanUnit of Academic Primary Care, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. K.Weetman@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0377-3933
Jeremy DaleUnit of Academic Primary Care, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Emma ScottUnit of Academic Primary Care, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Stephanie SchnurrCentre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Funding

CRCCG N/AEconomic and Social Research Council ES/J500203/1SWCCG N/AUKRI N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUK government guidelines and initiatives emphasise equity in delivery of care, shared decision-making, and patient-centred care. This includes sharing information with patients as partners in health decisions and empowering them to manage their health effectively. In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) routinely receive hospital discharge letters; while patients receiving copies of such letters is seen as "good practice" and recommended, it is not standardised. The effects and consequences of whether or not this happens remains unclear. The aim of this study (one of three forming the Discharge Communication Study) was to explore patient perspectives on receiving discharge letters and their views on how this could be improved in order to optimise patient experience and outcomes.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse sample of 50 patients recruited from 17 GP surgeries within the West Midlands, UK. All participants were adults with a recent episode of general hospital inpatient or outpatient care. Data were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using mixed methods corpus linguistics techniques.

resultsParticipants reported inconsistent access to discharge letters. Most wanted to receive a copy of their discharge letter although some expressed reservations. Perceived benefits included: increased understanding of their condition and treatment, reduced anxiety, and increased satisfaction. Consequences where participants had not received letters included: letter inaccuracies being overlooked, missed follow up actions, failure to fully remember diagnosis, treatment, or self-management or recommendations, and confusion and anxiety at what occurred and what will happen next. Participants felt the usefulness of receiving copies of letters could be increased by: including a patient information section, avoidance of acronyms, and jargon or technical terms explained with lay language.

conclusionsMost patients value receiving copies of hospital discharge letters, and should be consistently offered them. Patients' preferences for letter receipt could be logged in their health records. To enable positive outcomes letters should have a clear and accessible format that reflects the priorities and information needs of patients. Patients appear not to be receiving or being offered copies of letters consistently despite UK policies and guidelines supporting this practice; this suggests a need for greater standardisation of practice.

Indexed as

CommunicationCorrespondence as TopicAdultAmbulatory CareFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansMalePatient-Centered CarePatient DischargePatient SatisfactionUnited KingdomApplied linguisticsCopy lettersDischarge communicationDischarge lettersDoctor and patient communicationHospital dischargePatient discharge summariesPatient education

Identifiers

PMID32539716
PMCPMC7294646

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.