Discharge documentation of patients discharged to subacute facilities: a three-year quality improvement process across an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication among physicians during hospital discharge is critical to patient care. Partners Healthcare (Boston) has been engaged in a multi-year process to measure and improve the quality of documentation of all patients discharged from its five acute care hospitals to subacute facilities. METHODS: Partners first engaged stakeholders to develop a consensus set of 12 required data elements for all discharges to subacute facilities. A measurement process was established and later refined. Quality improvement interventions were then initiated to address measured deficiencies and included education of physicians and nurses, improvements in information technology, creation of or improvements in discharge documentation templates, training of hospitalists to serve as role models, feedback to physicians and their service chiefs regarding reviewed cases, and case manager review of documentation before discharge. To measure improvement in quality as a result of these efforts, rates of simultaneous inclusion of all 12 applicable data elements ("defect-free rate") were analyzed over time. RESULTS: Some 3,101 discharge documentation packets of patients discharged to subacute facilities from January 1, 2006, through September 2008 were retrospectively studied. During the 11 monitored quarters, the defect-free rate increased from 65% to 96% (p < .001 for trend). The largest improvements were seen in documentation of preadmission medication lists, allergies, follow-up, and warfarin information. CONCLUSIONS: Institution of rigorous measurement, feedback, and multidisciplinary, multimodal quality improvement processes improved the inclusion of data elements in discharge documentation required for safe hospital discharge across a large integrated health care system.

Communication and information deficits in patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities: an evaluation of five acute care hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The quality of discharge documentation in patients discharged to rehabilitation centers and other subacute facilities is less well studied than that of patients discharged home. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of information transfer among patients discharged from acute hospitals to subacute facilities across an integrated healthcare delivery system. DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of discharge documentation packets of selected patients. SETTING: Five acute care hospitals of the Partners Healthcare System. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the presence of specific data elements required to safely care for patients after discharge, including all data elements required by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (TJC). RESULTS: A total of 1501 discharge documentation packets were reviewed from March 2005 through June 2007. Only 1055 (70.3%) discharge summaries had all the information required by TJC, with physical examination at admission and condition at discharge most often missing (in 11.4% and 14.2% of cases, respectively). Other deficiencies not mandated by TJC included a list of preadmission medications (missing in 20.3%) and reasons for changes in these medications at discharge (35.3%), mention of pending test results (47.2%), and postdischarge management and follow-up plans (11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: We found room for improvement in the inclusion of data elements required for the safe transfer of patients from acute hospitals to subacute facilities, especially in areas such as medication reconciliation, pending test results, and adequate follow-up plans.

Deficits in discharge documentation in patients transferred to rehabilitation facilities on anticoagulation: results of a systemwide evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation is a commonly prescribed and effective therapy for several medical conditions but requires detailed communication among clinicians to avoid adverse patient outcomes following hospital discharge. METHODS: Discharge documentation packets of a sample of patients discharged from all five acute care hospitals of the Partners Healthcare System to 30 subacute facilities in Boston and prescribed anticoagulation for treatment or prophylaxis of thromboembolic disease were evaluated. Required data elements included information on anticoagulation indication, duration, dosing, monitoring, and follow-up. Discharge documentation packets were randomly selected for reviewers at acute sites, whereas reviewers at subacute sites selected which packets to review. RESULTS: Of 757 patients prescribed anticoagulation at discharge from March 2005 through June 2007, duration of therapy (for unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin [UFH/LMWH]) and recent dosing and monitoring information (for warfarin) were the areas with the biggest deficits. Of the patients prescribed UFH/LMWH or warfarin, 45.4% and 16.4%, respectively, had all the required information in the discharge summary. Patients discharged from community hospitals were more likely to be discharged with all the information needed for the use of warfarin (Odds Ratio [OR], 2.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-5.46) or UFH/LMWH (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.98-4.44) than patients discharged from academic medical centers. DISCUSSION: Important information to safely prescribe anticoagulation after discharge was often missing from the discharge summaries of patients transferred from acute hospitals to subacute facilities. Future research should focus on developing, implementing, and evaluating quality improvement interventions to address this gap.