Cargando…

Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Discharge documents are important for transferring information from hospitals to the referring clinician; in the UK and many countries, this is often the patient’s general practitioner or family physician. However, patients may or may not receive their discharge letters, and whether pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weetman, Katharine, Wong, Geoffrey, Scott, Emma, Schnurr, Stephanie, Dale, Jeremy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5695342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29133330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018353
_version_ 1783280296014118912
author Weetman, Katharine
Wong, Geoffrey
Scott, Emma
Schnurr, Stephanie
Dale, Jeremy
author_facet Weetman, Katharine
Wong, Geoffrey
Scott, Emma
Schnurr, Stephanie
Dale, Jeremy
author_sort Weetman, Katharine
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Discharge documents are important for transferring information from hospitals to the referring clinician; in the UK and many countries, this is often the patient’s general practitioner or family physician. However, patients may or may not receive their discharge letters, and whether patients should routinely receive discharge letters remains unclear. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will consolidate evidence on patients receiving discharge letters through the theory-driven approach of a realist review. The review will be conducted systematically and seek to explain how, why, for whom and in what contexts does this practice ‘work’. The review will specifically explore whether there are benefits of this practice and if so what are the important contexts for triggering the mechanisms associated with these outcome benefits. Negative effects will also be considered. Several steps will occur: devising initial rough programme theory, searching the evidence, selecting relevant documents, extracting data, synthesising and finally programme theory refinement. As the process is viewed as iterative, this cycle of steps may be repeated as many times as is necessary to reach theoretical saturation and may not be linear. The initial programme theory will be tested and refined throughout the review process and by stakeholder involvement of National Health Service (NHS) policy makers, practitioners and service users. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical review is not required. The resulting programme theory is anticipated to explain how the intervention of patients receiving written discharge communication may work in practice, for whom and in what contexts; this will inform best practice of patients receiving discharge communication. The review findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations and discussions with relevant organisations and stakeholders. While the review will be from the perspective of the UK NHS, its findings should be relevant to other healthcare systems. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017069863.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5695342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56953422017-11-24 Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol Weetman, Katharine Wong, Geoffrey Scott, Emma Schnurr, Stephanie Dale, Jeremy BMJ Open Health Services Research INTRODUCTION: Discharge documents are important for transferring information from hospitals to the referring clinician; in the UK and many countries, this is often the patient’s general practitioner or family physician. However, patients may or may not receive their discharge letters, and whether patients should routinely receive discharge letters remains unclear. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will consolidate evidence on patients receiving discharge letters through the theory-driven approach of a realist review. The review will be conducted systematically and seek to explain how, why, for whom and in what contexts does this practice ‘work’. The review will specifically explore whether there are benefits of this practice and if so what are the important contexts for triggering the mechanisms associated with these outcome benefits. Negative effects will also be considered. Several steps will occur: devising initial rough programme theory, searching the evidence, selecting relevant documents, extracting data, synthesising and finally programme theory refinement. As the process is viewed as iterative, this cycle of steps may be repeated as many times as is necessary to reach theoretical saturation and may not be linear. The initial programme theory will be tested and refined throughout the review process and by stakeholder involvement of National Health Service (NHS) policy makers, practitioners and service users. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical review is not required. The resulting programme theory is anticipated to explain how the intervention of patients receiving written discharge communication may work in practice, for whom and in what contexts; this will inform best practice of patients receiving discharge communication. The review findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations and discussions with relevant organisations and stakeholders. While the review will be from the perspective of the UK NHS, its findings should be relevant to other healthcare systems. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017069863. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5695342/ /pubmed/29133330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018353 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Services Research
Weetman, Katharine
Wong, Geoffrey
Scott, Emma
Schnurr, Stephanie
Dale, Jeremy
Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title_full Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title_fullStr Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title_full_unstemmed Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title_short Improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
title_sort improving best practice for patients receiving hospital discharge letters: a realist review protocol
topic Health Services Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5695342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29133330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018353
work_keys_str_mv AT weetmankatharine improvingbestpracticeforpatientsreceivinghospitaldischargelettersarealistreviewprotocol
AT wonggeoffrey improvingbestpracticeforpatientsreceivinghospitaldischargelettersarealistreviewprotocol
AT scottemma improvingbestpracticeforpatientsreceivinghospitaldischargelettersarealistreviewprotocol
AT schnurrstephanie improvingbestpracticeforpatientsreceivinghospitaldischargelettersarealistreviewprotocol
AT dalejeremy improvingbestpracticeforpatientsreceivinghospitaldischargelettersarealistreviewprotocol