Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2006; 45(04): 336-342
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1634084
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

Standardized Documentation of Drug Recommendations in Discharge Letters

A Contribution to Quality Management in Cooperative Care
P. Knaup
1   Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics, Department of Medical Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
,
J. Pilz
2   Center for Information Technology and Biomedical Engineering, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
,
J. Kaltschmidt
3   Department of Internal Medicine VI, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
,
S. Ludt
4   Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
,
J. Szecsenyi
4   Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
,
W. E. Haefeli
3   Department of Internal Medicine VI, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
06 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: To analyze the necessity and potential usefulness of a computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system in supporting the writing of pharmacotherapeutic recommendations in discharge letters.

Methods: Systematic analysis of drug recommendations in discharge letters of a hospital providing tertiary care, structured interviews with in-hospital prescribers, and focus groups with general practitioners who admit patients to this hospital.

Results: We analyzed 1800 randomly selected discharge letters, 1205 of which contained pharmaco-therapeutic recommendations. The frequencies, structure, and quality of these recommendations varied considerably between departments. Nearly 16% of the recommendations contained both proprietary (brand) and non-proprietary names (active ingredient). Interviewed clinicians expressed interest in CPOE systems that check for contraindications and interactions between drugs, suggest cheaper products, and automatically insert active ingredients when omitted. The focus group sessions confirmed that the pharmacotherapeutic recommendations in current discharge letters do not effectively support daily clinical practice.

Conclusions: Documenting active ingredients as well as brand names in drug therapy recommendations is currently not part of clinical practice. Computerized decision support can help to optimise the structure and communication of therapeutic information across interfaces and can be a quality factor with considerable influence on process quality, outcome quality, and costs of cooperative patient care.

Keywords

Medical informatics - decision support - drug information services - computerized medical records systems - discharge letters
 

  • References

  • 1 Bindels R, de Clercq PA, Winkens RA, Hasman A. A test ordering system with automated reminders for primary care based on practice guidelines. Int J Med Inform 2000; 58 (059) 219-33.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Thompson W, Dodek PM, Norena M, Dodek J. Computerized physician order entry of diagnostic tests in an intensive care unit is associated with improved timeliness of service. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 1306-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kaushal R, Shojania KG, Bates DW. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 1409-16.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 King WJ, Paice N, Rangrej J, Forestell GJ, Swartz R. The effect of computerized physician order entry on medication errors and adverse drug events in pediatric inpatients. Pediatrics 2003; 112: 506-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Koppel R, Metlay JP, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, Strom BL. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA 2005; 293: 1197-203.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Ball MJ, Garets DE, Handler TJ. Leveraging IT to Improve Patient Safety. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42: 503-9.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Potts AL, Barr FE, Gregory DF, Wright L, Patel NR. Computerized physician order entry and medication errors in a pediatric critical care unit. Pediatrics 2004; 113: 59-63.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Han YY, Carcillo JA, Venkataraman ST, Clark RS, Watson RS, Nguyen TC, Bayir H, Orr RA. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics 2005; 116: 1506-12.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Nebeker JR, Hoffman JM, Weir CR, Bennett CL, Hurdle JF. High rates of adverse drug events in a highly computerized hospital. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 1111-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Ash JS, Berg M, Coiera E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system- related errors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11: 104-12.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Sittig DF, Krall M, Kaalaas-Sittig J, Ash JS. Emotional aspects of computer-based provider order entry: a qualitative study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005; 12: 561-7.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Lipton HL, Miller RH, Wimbush JJ. Electronic prescribing: ready for prime time?. J Healthc Inf Manag 2003; 17: 72-9.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Campbell B, Vanslembroek K, Whitehead E, van de Wauwer C, Eifell R, Wyatt M, Campbell J. Views of doctors on clinical correspondence: questionnaire survey and audit of content of letters. Bmj 2004; 328: 1060-1.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Himmel W, Tabache M, Kochen MM. What happens to long-term medication when general practice patients are referred to hospital?. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 50: 253-7.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Stuffken R, Egberts TC. Discontinuities in drug use upon hospital discharge. Pharm World Sci 2004; 26: 268-70.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Harder S, Fischer P, Krause-Schafer M, Ostermann K, Helms G, Prinz H, Hahmann M, Baas H.. Structure and markers of appropriateness, quality and performance of drug treatment over a 1-year period after hospital discharge in a cohort of elderly patients with cardiovascular diseases from Germany. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 60: 797-805.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Roth-Isigkeit A, Harder S. Reporting the discharge medication in the discharge letter. An explorative survey of family doctors. Med Klin (Munich) 2005; 100: 87-93.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kaltschmidt J, Gallin S, Haefeli W. Essential functional requirements for an effective electronic drug information system in a hospital. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2004; 42: 615 (abstract)
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Morgan DL, Krueger RA. The Focus Group Kit. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications 1998
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Tang KC, Davis A, Sullivan S, Fisher J. A review of 5 existing guidelines for planning focus groups in GP research. Aust Fam Physician 1995; 24: 184-6.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Knaup P, Pilz J, Kaltschmidt J, Ludt S, Szecsenyi J, Haefeli WE. Gesetzeskonforme Verordnung von Medikamenten in Entlassbriefen: Ein Beitrag zum Qualitätsmanagement im Rahmen einer Integrierten Versorgung. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie. 50. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie (gmds), 12. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Epidemiologie. Freiburg im Breisgau, 12.-15.09.2005. Düsseldorf, Köln: German Medical Science; 2005. 2005 Doc 05gmds489.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Rote Liste Service GmbH. Rote Liste 2005. Aulendorf: ECV - Editio Cantor Verlag. 2005
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Tange HJ, Dietz JL, Hasman A, de Vries Robbe P. A generic model of clinical practice. Methods Inf Med 2003; 42: 203-11.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Denton IC. Will patients use electronic personal health records? Responses from a real-life experience. J Healthc Inf Manag 2001; 15: 251-9.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Shabo A, Vortman P, Robson B. Who’s Afraid of Lifetime Electronic Medical Records. In: Proceedings of 1st Annual Conference on Mobile and Wireless Healthcare Applications, November 11-14, 2001. London: Café Royal 2001
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Kim MI, Johnson KB. Personal Health Records: Evaluation of Functionality and Utility. JAMIA 2002; 9: 171-80.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Corley ST. Electronic prescribing: a review of costs and benefits. Top Health Inf Manage 2003; 24: 29-38.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Leven FJ, Haux R. Twenty-five years of medical informatics education at Heidelberg/Heilbronn: discussion of a specialized curriculum for medical informatics. Int J Med Inform 1998; 50: 31-42.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Knaup P, Haux R, Häber A, Lagemann A, Leiner F. Teaching the fundamentals of information systems management in health care. Lecture and practical training for students of Medical Informatics (Heidelberg/Heilbronn). Int J Med Inform 1998; 50: 195-205.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar