The impact of discharge letter content on unplanned hospital readmissions within 30 and 90 days in older adults with chronic illness - a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Care transitions are high-risk processes, especially for people with complex or chronic illness. Discharge letters are an opportunity to provide written information to improve patients' self-management after discharge. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of discharge letter content on unplanned hospital readmissions and self-rated quality of care transitions among patients 60 years of age or older with chronic illness. METHODS: The study had a convergent mixed methods design. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or congestive heart failure were recruited from two hospitals in Region Stockholm if they were living at home and Swedish-speaking. Patients with dementia or cognitive impairment, or a "do not resuscitate" statement in their medical record were excluded. Discharge letters from 136 patients recruited to a randomised controlled trial were coded using an assessment matrix and deductive content analysis. The assessment matrix was based on a literature review performed to identify key elements in discharge letters that facilitate a safe care transition to home. The coded key elements were transformed into a quantitative variable of "SAFE-D score". Bivariate correlations between SAFE-D score and quality of care transition as well as unplanned readmissions within 30 and 90 days were calculated. Lastly, a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate associations between SAFE-D score and time to readmission. RESULTS: All discharge letters contained at least five of eleven key elements. In less than two per cent of the discharge letters, all eleven key elements were present. Neither SAFE-D score, nor single key elements correlated with 30-day or 90-day readmission rate. SAFE-D score was not associated with time to readmission when adjusted for a range of patient characteristics and self-rated quality of care transitions. CONCLUSIONS: While written summaries play a role, they may not be sufficient on their own to ensure safe care transitions and effective self-care management post-discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials. giv, NCT02823795, 01/09/2016.

Communication about medication management during patient-physician consultations in primary care: a participant observation study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore communication about medication management during annual consultations in primary care. DESIGN: passive participant observations of primary care consultations. SETTING: Two primary care centres in southern Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: Consultations between 18 patients (over the age of 60 years) with chronic diseases and 10 general practitioners (GPs) were observed, audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Four categories emerged: communication barriers, striving for a shared understanding of medication management, evaluation of the current medication treatment and the plan ahead and behavioural changes in relation to medication management. Misunderstandings in communication, failure to report changes in the medication treatment and use of generic substitutes complicated mutual understanding and agreement on continued treatment. The need for behavioural changes to reduce the need for medication treatment was recognised but should be explored further. CONCLUSION: Several pitfalls, including miscommunication and inaccurate medication lists, for safe medication management were identified. The purpose of annual consultations should be clarified, individual treatment plans could be used more actively during primary care consultations and efforts are needed to improve verbal communication and information continuity.