从医院到全科医生的用药协调和出院沟通:定量分析。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Australian journal of primary health Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1071/PY22232
Melinda Gusmeroli, Stephen Perks, Nicole Bates
{"title":"从医院到全科医生的用药协调和出院沟通:定量分析。","authors":"Melinda Gusmeroli, Stephen Perks, Nicole Bates","doi":"10.1071/PY22232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the quality of effective discharge communication to primary practice from a hospital that uses ieMR (integrated electronic Medical Record), a complete electronic prescribing/medical record platform.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective quantitative analysis of 232 discharge encounters from a major tertiary hospital assessed the discharge summary quality; timeliness, completeness and medication information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median time to discharge summary was 1day. 22.0% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge and 44.5% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge if discharged on a weekend compared to weekday (P -value=0.001). Rates of medication reconciliation were completed at approximately 35% at each point of the patient stay and 56.9% of patients had a GP discharge summary listing discharge medications. However, if certain progressive steps were completed (i.e. Home Medications recorded in ieMR, Discharge Reconciliation in ieMR, and Patient Discharge Medication Record in eLMs (Enterprise-wide Liaison Medication System)), then, the 'Medications on Discharge' was significantly more likely to be present in the discharge summary, at rates of 70.1%, 85.9%, and 98.6% respectively (P -value=0.007, <0.001, <0.001). Conversely not doing these steps dropped rates of having medications listed in the discharge summary to 50.0%, 40.3% and 34.1% respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study assessed current discharge summary quality since the introduction of electronic medical records. It demonstrated the significant value of correct use of electronic programs, including performing all crucial steps of reconciliation. Targeted interventions in future studies that rectify the shortfalls in discharge communication are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":8651,"journal":{"name":"Australian journal of primary health","volume":" ","pages":"679-685"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medication reconciliation and discharge communication from hospital to general practice: a quantitative analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Melinda Gusmeroli, Stephen Perks, Nicole Bates\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/PY22232\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the quality of effective discharge communication to primary practice from a hospital that uses ieMR (integrated electronic Medical Record), a complete electronic prescribing/medical record platform.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective quantitative analysis of 232 discharge encounters from a major tertiary hospital assessed the discharge summary quality; timeliness, completeness and medication information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median time to discharge summary was 1day. 22.0% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge and 44.5% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge if discharged on a weekend compared to weekday (P -value=0.001). Rates of medication reconciliation were completed at approximately 35% at each point of the patient stay and 56.9% of patients had a GP discharge summary listing discharge medications. However, if certain progressive steps were completed (i.e. Home Medications recorded in ieMR, Discharge Reconciliation in ieMR, and Patient Discharge Medication Record in eLMs (Enterprise-wide Liaison Medication System)), then, the 'Medications on Discharge' was significantly more likely to be present in the discharge summary, at rates of 70.1%, 85.9%, and 98.6% respectively (P -value=0.007, <0.001, <0.001). Conversely not doing these steps dropped rates of having medications listed in the discharge summary to 50.0%, 40.3% and 34.1% respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study assessed current discharge summary quality since the introduction of electronic medical records. It demonstrated the significant value of correct use of electronic programs, including performing all crucial steps of reconciliation. Targeted interventions in future studies that rectify the shortfalls in discharge communication are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8651,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian journal of primary health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"679-685\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian journal of primary health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/PY22232\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian journal of primary health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/PY22232","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景本研究的目的是评估一家使用完整电子处方/医疗记录平台 ieMR(集成电子医疗记录)的医院与基层医疗机构进行有效出院沟通的质量:方法:对一家大型三级甲等医院的 232 次出院情况进行回顾性定量分析,评估出院总结的质量、及时性、完整性和用药信息:出院总结的中位时间为 1 天。在出院后 30 天内,22.0% 的出院摘要不完整,如果在周末出院,44.5% 的出院摘要不完整(P 值=0.001)。在患者住院期间的每个阶段,药物对账完成率约为 35%,56.9% 的患者有一份列出出院药物的全科医生出院总结。然而,如果完成了某些渐进步骤(即在 ieMR 中记录居家用药、在 ieMR 中进行出院对账、在 eLMs(全企业联络用药系统)中记录患者出院用药),那么 "出院用药 "就更有可能出现在出院摘要中,比例分别为 70.1%、85.9% 和 98.6%(P -value=0.007, 结论):本研究评估了自引入电子病历以来出院摘要的质量。它证明了正确使用电子程序的重要价值,包括执行所有关键的核对步骤。有必要在今后的研究中采取有针对性的干预措施,以纠正出院沟通中的不足之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Medication reconciliation and discharge communication from hospital to general practice: a quantitative analysis.

Background: The aim of this study was to assess the quality of effective discharge communication to primary practice from a hospital that uses ieMR (integrated electronic Medical Record), a complete electronic prescribing/medical record platform.

Methods: A retrospective quantitative analysis of 232 discharge encounters from a major tertiary hospital assessed the discharge summary quality; timeliness, completeness and medication information.

Results: Median time to discharge summary was 1day. 22.0% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge and 44.5% of discharge summaries were incomplete at 30days post discharge if discharged on a weekend compared to weekday (P -value=0.001). Rates of medication reconciliation were completed at approximately 35% at each point of the patient stay and 56.9% of patients had a GP discharge summary listing discharge medications. However, if certain progressive steps were completed (i.e. Home Medications recorded in ieMR, Discharge Reconciliation in ieMR, and Patient Discharge Medication Record in eLMs (Enterprise-wide Liaison Medication System)), then, the 'Medications on Discharge' was significantly more likely to be present in the discharge summary, at rates of 70.1%, 85.9%, and 98.6% respectively (P -value=0.007, <0.001, <0.001). Conversely not doing these steps dropped rates of having medications listed in the discharge summary to 50.0%, 40.3% and 34.1% respectively.

Conclusions: This study assessed current discharge summary quality since the introduction of electronic medical records. It demonstrated the significant value of correct use of electronic programs, including performing all crucial steps of reconciliation. Targeted interventions in future studies that rectify the shortfalls in discharge communication are warranted.

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 journal of primary health
Australian journal of primary health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
136
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Primary Health integrates the theory and practise of community health services and primary health care. The journal publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed research, reviews, policy reports and analyses from around the world. Articles cover a range of issues influencing community health services and primary health care, particularly comprehensive primary health care research, evidence-based practice (excluding discipline-specific clinical interventions) and primary health care policy issues. Australian Journal of Primary Health is an important international resource for all individuals and organisations involved in the planning, provision or practise of primary health care. Australian Journal of Primary Health is published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of La Trobe University.
期刊最新文献
Australian healthcare professionals’ beliefs and practice behaviours in management of chronic pelvic pain: a cross-sectional survey General practice registrars’ practice in outer metropolitan Australia: a cross-sectional comparison with rural and inner metropolitan areas Hepatitis C elimination: amplifying the role of primary care nurses in Australia Abstracts of the Australasian Association for Academic Primary Care (AAAPC) Annual Research Conference Older patients want to talk about sexual health in Australian primary care
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1