Cited by 6Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNursing Diagnosis and DocumentationHospital Admissions and Outcomes

An evaluation of discharge documentation for people with dementia discharged home from hospital—A cross-sectional pilot study

Kable, Ashley, Pond, Dimity, Hullick, Carolyn, Chenoweth, Lynnette, Duggan, Anne, Attia, John, Oldmeadow, Christopher·2019·Dementia

Abstract

This study evaluated discharge documentation for people with dementia who were discharged home, against expected discharge criteria and determined relationships between compliance scores and outcomes. This cross-sectional study audited discharge documentation and conducted a post discharge survey of carers. There were 73 eligible discharges and clinically significant documentation deficits for people with dementia included: risk assessments of confusion (48%), falls and pressure injury (56%); provision of medication dose-decision aids (53%), provision of contact information for patient support groups (6%) and advance care planning (9%). There was no significant relationship between compliance scores and outcomes. Carer strain was reported to be high for many carers. People with dementia and their carers are more vulnerable and at higher risk of poor outcomes after discharge. There are opportunities for improved provision of medications and risk assessment for people with dementia, provision of information for patient support groups and advanced care planning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1471301217728845

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kable, A., Pond, D., Hullick, C., Chenoweth, L., Duggan, A., Attia, J., & Oldmeadow, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
  • Hunter New England Local Health District (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Kable, Ashley
Venue
Dementia
Published
2017-09-06
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
1764-1776
ISSN
  • 1471-3012 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-2684
OpenAlex
W2774528588
Cited by
6
References
11
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Dementia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Dementia Collaborative Research Centres, Australia
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
hospital discharge documentation, discharge planning, carer strain, post-discharge outcomes, risk assessment, falls, pressure ulcers, advance care planning, patient support groups
MeSH terms
Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dementia, Female, Hospitals, Humans, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Patient Discharge, Pilot Projects, Caregivers

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