Is email an effective method for hospital discharge communication? A randomized controlled trial to examine delivery of computer-generated discharge summaries by email, fax, post and patient hand delivery

被引:32
作者
Chen, Yufei [2 ]
Brennan, Nicholas [3 ]
Magrabi, Farah [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Ctr Hlth Informat, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
[2] Univ New S Wales, Fac Med, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
[3] St Vincents Hosp, Dept Geriatr Med, Darlinghurst, NSW 2010, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Patient discharge; Communication; Randomized controlled trial; Continuity of patient care; Primary care; Medical informatics application; Electronic mail; ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION; PRACTITIONERS; CARE; INFORMATION; CONTINUITY; PHYSICIANS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2009.12.006
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Objective: To examine the effectiveness of delivering of computer-generated discharge summaries to general practice by email, fax, post and patient hand delivery. Design: Blinded, randomized controlled trial. A pre-study audit ascertaining baseline statistics and a follow-up survey were conducted with general practice to determine preferred medium for receiving discharge communication. Participants and setting: 196 geriatric patients who were admitted to the aged care ward of a 300-bed metropolitan teaching hospital. Twenty-eight patients were lost to follow-up and 52 general practices participated in the final survey. The pre-study audit followed 63 discharges from the same ward. Intervention: 168 eligible patients were randomly assigned to have their electronic discharge summary sent by email (n = 40), fax (n = 48), post (n = 40) or patient hand delivery (n = 40). Main outcome measures: Receipt of discharge summary by the general practice clinic within 7 days of patient discharge from hospital. Results: The receipt rates for email (73.9%, n = 17) and fax were comparable (69.4%, n = 25; chi(2) = 0.137, df = 1, P = 0.712), and significantly higher (chi(2) = 19.86, df = 3, P < 0.0002) than post (43.8%, n = 14) and patient hand delivery (24.2%, n = 8). General practices indicated that fax was the most preferred method (82.7%) for communication of discharge summaries. The majority of general practices (75.0%) utilized an electronic system for storage of patient information while 88.5% of practices reported using medical prescribing software. Conclusions: Transmission of computer-generated discharge summaries by fax or email offers the most effective method of communicating with primary care physicians, as long as accurate contact information is available. Although fax is still the most preferred, email has many advantages that could potentially allow it to replace fax as a standard mode for delivery of discharge communication. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:167 / 172
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Are general practitioners satisfied with electronic discharge summaries? [J].
Alderton, Melanie ;
Callen, Joanne L. .
HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2007, 36 (01) :7-12
[2]  
[Anonymous], GEN PRACTICE SERIES
[3]   IMPROVING THE CONTINUITY OF CARE BETWEEN GENERAL-PRACTITIONERS AND PUBLIC HOSPITALS [J].
BALLA, JI ;
JAMIESON, WE .
MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 1994, 161 (11-12) :656-659
[4]  
Bertrand D, 1998, Int J Health Care Qual Assur Inc Leadersh Health Serv, V11, P90, DOI 10.1108/09526869810213019
[5]   ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PROVIDERS OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CARE [J].
BRANGER, PJ ;
VANDERWOUDEN, JC ;
SCHUDEL, BR ;
VERBOOG, E ;
DUISTERHOUT, JS ;
VANDERLEI, J ;
VANBEMMEL, JH .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1992, 305 (6861) :1068-1070
[6]   Posthospital medication discrepancies - Prevalence and contributing factors [J].
Coleman, EA ;
Smith, JD ;
Raha, D ;
Min, SJ .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2005, 165 (16) :1842-1847
[7]  
CURRAN P, 1992, ULSTER MED J, V61, P56
[8]  
*DEP HLTH AG, PRACT INC PROGR EHEA
[9]  
Dover S B, 1984, Health Trends, V16, P48
[10]   Communication breakdown in the outpatient referral process [J].
Gandhi, TK ;
Sittig, DF ;
Franklin, M ;
Sussman, AJ ;
Fairchild, DG ;
Bates, DW .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2000, 15 (09) :626-631