Review of electronic discharge summaries from the general medicine, general surgery and mental health streams at a tertiary hospital: retrospective analysis of timeliness, brevity and completeness.

Objective: This retrospective study identified and compared the performance of electronic discharge summaries (EDSs) from three hospital in-patient streams (surgical, medical and mental health) with Australian standards. Methods: An audit was performed of 120 EDSs extracted from a tertiary hospital. Auditors evaluated each EDS using an adaptation of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care's EDS toolkit. Results: EDSs from all in-patient streams were lengthy and most did not include information regarding discharge destination, patient education or recommendations. General Medicine EDSs were most timely, averaging within 1 day of discharge. Conclusions: Key areas of improvement remain for improving the timeliness, brevity and completeness of EDSs. Key areas identified for improvement include page length, discharge destination, alerts, patient education and recommendations. Variability in audit results between streams suggests the need for speciality-specific templates, standards and medical officer training. What is known about the topic?: The literature suggests that an EDS is timely if it is completed within 2 days of discharge. A complete and brief EDS should also include key details of the care in two (or fewer) pages. What does this paper add?: This paper evaluated 120 EDSs, compared them against a standard and stratified the EDSs according to three core clinical in-patient streams that produced them (surgical, medical and mental health). What are the implications for practitioners?: Although broad guidelines for timeliness, brevity and completeness have been established for EDSs, each in-patient stream will require different standards. A hospital or health service should have established standards relevant to each in-patient stream. Before commencing a term in any of the three in-patient streams, medical officers who are to generate EDSs should be trained in the required standard. Training should highlight critical elements of a speciality stream to ensure EDS authors are aware of the nuances of the stream in which they are rotating. In addition, general practitioners should liaise with local hospitals to ensure ongoing dialogue and improvement of clinical handover documents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]