Dictated versus database-generated discharge summaries: a randomized clinical trial

Citation
C. Van Walraven et al., Dictated versus database-generated discharge summaries: a randomized clinical trial, CAN MED A J, 160(3), 1999, pp. 319-326
Citations number
46
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine","Medical Research General Topics
Journal title
CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL
ISSN journal
08203946 → ACNP
Volume
160
Issue
3
Year of publication
1999
Pages
319 - 326
Database
ISI
SICI code
0820-3946(19990209)160:3<319:DVDDSA>2.0.ZU;2-M
Abstract
Background: Hospital discharge summaries communicate information necessary for continuing patient care. They are most commonly generated by voice dict ation and are often of poor quality. The objective of this study was to com pare discharge summaries created by voice dictation with those generated fr om a clinical database. Methods: A randomized clinical trial was performed in which discharge summa ries for patients discharged from a general Internal medicine service at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Ottawa were created by voice dictation ( 151 patients) or from a database (142 patients). Patients had been admitted between September 1996 and June 1997. The trial was preceded by a baseline . cohort study in which all summaries were created by dictation. For the da tabase group, information on forms completed by housestaff was entered into a database and collated into a discharge summary. For the dictation group, housestaff dictated narrative letters. The proportion of patients for whom a summary was generated within 4 weeks of discharge was recorded. Physicia ns receiving the summary rated its quality, completeness, organization and timeliness on a 100-mm visual analogue scale. Housestaff preference was als o determined. Results: Patients in the database group and the dictation group were simila r. A summary was much more likely to be generated within 4 weeks of dischar ge for patients in the database group than for those in the dictation group (113 [79.6%] v. 86 [57.0%]; p < 0.001). Summary quality was similar (mean rating 72.7 [standard deviation (SD) 19.3] v; 74.9 [SD 16.6]), as were asse ssments of completeness (73.4 [SD 19.8] v. 78.2 [SD 14.9]), organization (7 7.4 [SD 16.3] v. 79.3 [SD 17.2]) and timeliness (70.3 [SD 21.9] v. 66.2 [SD 25.6]). Many information items of interest were more likely to be included in the database-generated summaries. The database system created summaries faster and was preferred by housestaff. Dictated summaries in the baseline and randomized studies were similar, which indicated that the control grou p was not substantially different from the baseline cohort. Interpretation: The database system significantly increased the likelihood that a discharge summary was created. Housestaff preferred the database sys tem for summary generation. Physicians thought that the quality of summarie s generated by the 2 methods was similar. The use of computer databases to create hospital discharge summaries is promising and merits further study a nd refinement.