全科医生对出院总结的看法,从健康网络的三家医院在南澳大利亚。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nicholas L Scarfo, Sayeh Dehghanian, Mai Duong, Richard J Woodman, Pravin Shetty, Henry Lu, Cameron J Phillips
{"title":"全科医生对出院总结的看法,从健康网络的三家医院在南澳大利亚。","authors":"Nicholas L Scarfo,&nbsp;Sayeh Dehghanian,&nbsp;Mai Duong,&nbsp;Richard J Woodman,&nbsp;Pravin Shetty,&nbsp;Henry Lu,&nbsp;Cameron J Phillips","doi":"10.1071/AH23072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objectives To explore general practitioners' perspectives on the discharge summaries they receive about their patients who have been discharged from hospital. Methods A survey of general practitioners in the catchment of a major metropolitan South Australian health service consisting of three teaching hospitals was undertaken. Surveys were disseminated electronically and via hardcopy mailout to general practitioners. The 36-question survey focused on five constructs of discharge summaries: accessibility, length and clarity, format, transparency, and medicines content. Results A total of 150 general practitioners responded (response rate, 27.6%). Respondents were vocationally registered (96%), predominately from metropolitan practices (90.2%), and 65.8% were female. Overwhelmingly, 86.7% of general practitioners stated that the optimal time for receipt of discharge summaries was <48 h post-discharge, and 96.6% considered that late arrival of discharge summaries adversely impacts patient care. The ideal length of discharge summaries was reported as <4 pages by 64% of respondents. A large proportion of respondents (84.6%) would like to be notified when their patients are admitted and discharged from hospital, and 82.7% were supportive of patients receiving their own copy of the discharge summary. A total of 76.7% general practitioners reported that they had detected omissions or discrepancies in the discharge summaries. Provision of rationale for medication changes was viewed as important by 86.7%, however, only 29.3% reported that it is always or often communicated. Conclusions General practitioners supported timely receipt, concise length of discharge summary and format refinement to improve the utility and communication of this important clinical handover from hospital to community care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55425,"journal":{"name":"Australian Health Review","volume":"47 4","pages":"433-440"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"General practitioners' perspectives on discharge summaries from a health network of three hospitals in South Australia.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas L Scarfo,&nbsp;Sayeh Dehghanian,&nbsp;Mai Duong,&nbsp;Richard J Woodman,&nbsp;Pravin Shetty,&nbsp;Henry Lu,&nbsp;Cameron J Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/AH23072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Objectives To explore general practitioners' perspectives on the discharge summaries they receive about their patients who have been discharged from hospital. Methods A survey of general practitioners in the catchment of a major metropolitan South Australian health service consisting of three teaching hospitals was undertaken. Surveys were disseminated electronically and via hardcopy mailout to general practitioners. The 36-question survey focused on five constructs of discharge summaries: accessibility, length and clarity, format, transparency, and medicines content. Results A total of 150 general practitioners responded (response rate, 27.6%). Respondents were vocationally registered (96%), predominately from metropolitan practices (90.2%), and 65.8% were female. Overwhelmingly, 86.7% of general practitioners stated that the optimal time for receipt of discharge summaries was <48 h post-discharge, and 96.6% considered that late arrival of discharge summaries adversely impacts patient care. The ideal length of discharge summaries was reported as <4 pages by 64% of respondents. A large proportion of respondents (84.6%) would like to be notified when their patients are admitted and discharged from hospital, and 82.7% were supportive of patients receiving their own copy of the discharge summary. A total of 76.7% general practitioners reported that they had detected omissions or discrepancies in the discharge summaries. Provision of rationale for medication changes was viewed as important by 86.7%, however, only 29.3% reported that it is always or often communicated. Conclusions General practitioners supported timely receipt, concise length of discharge summary and format refinement to improve the utility and communication of this important clinical handover from hospital to community care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55425,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Health Review\",\"volume\":\"47 4\",\"pages\":\"433-440\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Health Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23072\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Health Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23072","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的探讨全科医生对他们收到的出院病人出院总结的看法。方法对由三所教学医院组成的南澳大利亚州主要城市卫生服务中心的全科医生进行调查。调查以电子方式和纸质形式发送给全科医生。36个问题的调查重点关注出院摘要的五个结构:可及性、长度和清晰度、格式、透明度和药物内容。结果共150名全科医生应答,应答率为27.6%。受访者有职业登记(96%),主要来自大都市执业(90.2%),65.8%为女性。绝大多数,86.7%的全科医生表示收到出院摘要的最佳时间是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
General practitioners' perspectives on discharge summaries from a health network of three hospitals in South Australia.

Objectives To explore general practitioners' perspectives on the discharge summaries they receive about their patients who have been discharged from hospital. Methods A survey of general practitioners in the catchment of a major metropolitan South Australian health service consisting of three teaching hospitals was undertaken. Surveys were disseminated electronically and via hardcopy mailout to general practitioners. The 36-question survey focused on five constructs of discharge summaries: accessibility, length and clarity, format, transparency, and medicines content. Results A total of 150 general practitioners responded (response rate, 27.6%). Respondents were vocationally registered (96%), predominately from metropolitan practices (90.2%), and 65.8% were female. Overwhelmingly, 86.7% of general practitioners stated that the optimal time for receipt of discharge summaries was <48 h post-discharge, and 96.6% considered that late arrival of discharge summaries adversely impacts patient care. The ideal length of discharge summaries was reported as <4 pages by 64% of respondents. A large proportion of respondents (84.6%) would like to be notified when their patients are admitted and discharged from hospital, and 82.7% were supportive of patients receiving their own copy of the discharge summary. A total of 76.7% general practitioners reported that they had detected omissions or discrepancies in the discharge summaries. Provision of rationale for medication changes was viewed as important by 86.7%, however, only 29.3% reported that it is always or often communicated. Conclusions General practitioners supported timely receipt, concise length of discharge summary and format refinement to improve the utility and communication of this important clinical handover from hospital to community care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Health Review
Australian Health Review 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
134
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Health Review is an international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes contributions on all aspects of health policy, management and governance; healthcare delivery systems; workforce; health financing; and other matters of interest to those working in health care. In addition to analyses and commentary, the journal publishes original research from practitioners – managers and clinicians – and reports of breakthrough projects that demonstrate better ways of delivering care. Australian Health Review explores major national and international health issues and questions, enabling health professionals to keep their fingers on the pulse of the nation’s health decisions and to know what the most influential commentators and decision makers are thinking. Australian Health Review is a valuable resource for managers, policy makers and clinical staff in health organisations, including government departments, hospitals, community centres and aged-care facilities, as well as anyone with an interest in the health industry. Australian Health Review is published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信