Cited by 127Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePatient Satisfaction in HealthcareHospital Admissions and Outcomes

Discharge communication practices and healthcare provider and patient preferences, satisfaction and comprehension: A systematic review

Open access
Newnham, Harvey, Barker, Anna, Ritchie, Edward, Hitchcock, Karen, Gibbs, Harry, Holton, Sara·2017·International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Abstract

PURPOSE: To systematically review the available evidence about hospital discharge communication practices and identify which practices were preferred by patients and healthcare providers, improved patient and provider satisfaction, and increased patients' understanding of their medical condition. DATA SOURCES: OVID Medline, Web of Science, ProQuest, PubMed and CINAHL plus. STUDY SELECTION: Databases were searched for peer-reviewed, English-language papers, published to August 2016, of empirical research using quantitative or qualitative methods. Reference lists in the papers meeting inclusion criteria were searched to identify further papers. DATA EXTRACTION: Of the 3489 articles identified, 30 met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Much research to date has focused on the use of printed material and person-based discharge communication methods including verbal instructions (either in person or via telephone calls). Several studies have examined the use of information technology (IT) such as computer-generated and video-based discharge communication practices. Utilizing technology to deliver discharge information is preferred by healthcare providers and patients, and improves patients' understanding of their medical condition and discharge instructions. CONCLUSION: Well-designed IT solutions may improve communication, coordination and retention of information, and lead to improved outcomes for patients, their families, caregivers and primary healthcare providers as well as expediting the task for hospital staff.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/intqhc/mzx121

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [32]32. Naylor M, Brooten D, Campbell R et al. Comprehensive discharge plan- ning and home follow-up of hospitalised elders. JAMA 1999;281:613-20.
  2. [50]50. Atzema CL, Austin PC, Wu L et al. Speak fast, use jargon, and don't repeat yourself: a randomized trial assessing the effectiveness of online videos to supplement emergency department discharge instructions. PLoS ONE [Electronic Resource] 2013;8:e77057.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Newnham, H., Barker, A., Ritchie, E., Hitchcock, K., Gibbs, H., & Holton, S.
Affiliations
  • The Alfred Hospital (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Holton, Sara
Venue
International Journal for Quality in Health Care
Published
2017-09-07
Volume
29
Issue
6
Pages
752-768
ISSN
  • 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3677
OpenAlex
W2751822727
Cited by
127
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal for Quality in Health Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Victorian Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (APP1067236)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
hospital discharge communication, patient satisfaction, healthcare provider preferences, patient understanding, discharge instructions, health information technology, patient-provider communication
MeSH terms
Communication, Health Personnel, Humans, Medical Informatics, Patient Discharge, Professional-Patient Relations, Patient Satisfaction, Patient Preference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review