Does information structuring improve recall of discharge information? A cluster randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of the quality of discharge communication between physicians and their patients is critical on patients' health outcomes. Nevertheless, low recall of information given to patients at discharge from emergency departments (EDs) is a well-documented problem. Therefore, we investigated the outcomes and related benefits of two different communication strategies: Physicians were instructed to either use empathy (E) or information structuring (S) skills hypothesizing superior recall by patients in the S group. METHODS: For the direct comparison of two communication strategies at discharge, physicians were cluster-randomized to an E or a S skills training. Feasibility was measured by training completion rates. Outcomes were measured in patients immediately after discharge, after 7, and 30 days. Primary outcome was patients' immediate recall of discharge information. Secondary outcomes were feasibility of training implementation, patients' adherence to recommendations and satisfaction, as well as the patient-physician relationship. RESULTS: Of 117 eligible physicians, 80 (68.4%) completed the training. Out of 256 patients randomized to one of the two training groups (E: 146 and S: 119) 196 completed the post-discharge assessment. Patients' immediate recall of discharge information was superior in patients in the S-group vs. E-group. Patients in the S-group adhered to more recommendations within 30 days (p = .002), and were more likely to recommend the physician to family and friends (p = .021). No differences were found on other assessed outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Immediate recall and subsequent adherence to recommendations were higher in the S group. Feasibility was shown by a 69.6% completion rate of trainings. Thus, trainings of discharge information structuring are feasible and improve patients' recall, and may therefore improve quality of care in the ED.

Understanding what matters most to patients in acute care in seven countries, using the flash mob study design.

BACKGROUND: Truly patient-centred care needs to be aligned with what patients consider important, and is highly desirable in the first 24 h of an acute admission, as many decisions are made during this period. However, there is limited knowledge on what matters most to patients in this phase of their hospital stay. The objective of this study was to identify what mattered most to patients in acute care and to assess the patient perspective as to whether their treating doctors were aware of this. METHODS: This was a large-scale, qualitative, flash mob study, conducted simultaneously in sixty-six hospitals in seven countries, starting November 14th 2018, ending 50 h later. One thousand eight hundred fifty adults in the first 24 h of an acute medical admission were interviewed on what mattered most to them, why this mattered and whether they felt the treating doctor was aware of this. RESULTS: The most reported answers to "what matters most (and why)?" were 'getting better or being in good health' (why: to be with family/friends or pick-up life again), 'getting home' (why: more comfortable at home or to take care of someone) and 'having a diagnosis' (why: to feel less anxious or insecure). Of all patients, 51.9% felt the treating doctor did not know what mattered most to them. CONCLUSIONS: The priorities for acutely admitted patients were ostensibly disease- and care-oriented and thus in line with the hospitals' own priorities. However, answers to why these were important were diverse, more personal, and often related to psychological well-being and relations. A large group of patients felt their treating doctor did not know what mattered most to them. Explicitly asking patients what is important and why, could help healthcare professionals to get to know the person behind the patient, which is essential in delivering patient-centred care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR (Netherlands Trial Register) NTR7538 .

The influence of information structuring and health literacy on recall and satisfaction in a simulated discharge communication.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effects of information structuring and its potential interaction with pre-existing medical knowledge on recall in a simulated discharge communication. METHODS: 127 proxy-patients (i.e. students) were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. Video vignettes provided identical information, differing in means of information structuring only: The natural conversation (NC) condition was not explicitly structured whereas the structure (S) condition presented information organised by chapter headings. The book metaphor (BM) and the post organizer (PO) conditions also presented structured information but in addition included a synopsis, either at the beginning or at the end of discharge communication, respectively. Proxy-patients' recall, perception of quality and pre-existing medical knowledge were assessed. RESULTS: Information structuring (conditions: S, BM, PO) did not increase recall in comparison to NC, but pre-existing medical knowledge improved recall (p < .01). An interaction between medical knowledge and recall in the BM condition was found (p = .02). In comparison to the NC, proxy-patients in all information structuring conditions more strongly recommended the physician (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Structured discharge communication complemented by the BM is beneficial in individuals with lower pre-existing medical knowledge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The lower pre-existing medical knowledge, the more recipients will profit from information structuring with the BM.