Readable discharge instructions may help caregivers understand and implement care plans following hospitalization. Many caregivers of hospitalized children, however, have limited literacy. We aimed to increase the percentage of discharge instructions written at 7th grade level or lower for hospital medicine patients from 13% to 80% in 6 months.
Methods
Quality improvement efforts targeted a 42-bed unit at the community satellite of our large, urban academic hospital. A multidisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, and parents focused on key drivers: family engagement in discharge process, standardization of discharge instructions, staff engagement in discharge preparedness, and audit and feedback of data. Improvement cycles included 1) education and implementation of a general discharge instruction template in the electronic health record (EHR); 2) visible reminders and tips for writing readable discharge instructions; 3) implementation of disease-specific discharge instruction templates in the EHR; and 4) individualized feedback to staff on readability and content of their written discharge instructions. Instructions were individually scored for readability using an online platform. An annotated control chart assessed the impact of interventions over time.
Results
Through sequential interventions over 6 months, the percentage of discharge instructions written at 7th grade or lower readability level increased from 13% to 98% and has been sustained for 4 months. The reliable use of the EHR templates was associated with our largest improvements.
The improvement team consisted of 4 pediatric hospitalists, 2 NPs, 1 nurse educator with health literacy expertise, 1 pediatric resident, 1 fourth-year medical student, 1 QI consultant, and 2 parents who had first-hand experience on the HM service. The improvement team observed the discharge process, including roles of the provider, nurse and family, outlined a process map, and created a modified failure mode and effect analysis.21 Prior to our work, discharge instructions written by providers often occurred as a last step, and the content was created as free text or from nonstandardized templates. Key drivers that informed interventions were determined and revised over time (Figure 1). The study was reviewed by our institutional review board and deemed not human subjects research.
Figure 1
Improvement Activities
Key drivers were identified, and interventions were executed using Plan-Do Study-Act cycles.22 The key drivers thought to be critical for the success of the QI efforts were family engagement; standardization of discharge instructions; medical staff engagement; and audit and feedback of data. The corresponding interventions were as follows:
Family Engagement
Understanding the discharge information families desired. Prior to testing, 10 families admitted to the HM service were asked about the discharge experience. We asked families about information they wanted in written discharge instructions: 1) reasons to call your primary doctor or return to the hospital; 2) when to see your primary doctor for a follow-up visit; 3) the phone number to reach your child’s doctor; 4) more information about why your child was admitted; 5) information about new medications; and 6) what to do to help your child continue to recover at home.
Development of templates. We engaged families throughout the process of creating general and disease-specific discharge templates. After a specific template was created and reviewed by the parents on our team, it was sent to members of the institutional Patient Education Committee, which includes parents and local health literacy experts, to review and critique. Feedback from the reviewers was incorporated into the templates prior to use in the EHR.
Postdischarge phone calls.A convenience sample of families discharged from the satellite campus was called 24 to 48 hours after discharge over a 2-week period in January, 2016. A member of our improvement team solicited feedback from families about the quality of the discharge instructions. Families were asked if discharge instructions were reviewed with them prior to going home, if they were given a copy of the instructions, how they would rate the ability to read and use the information, and if there were additional pieces of information that would have improved the instructions.
Standardization of Instructions
Education. A presentation was created and shared with medical providers; it was re-disseminated monthly to new residents rotating onto the service and to the attendings, fellows, and NPs scheduled for shifts during the month. This education continued for the duration of the study. The presentation included the definition of health literacy, scope of the problem, examples of poorly written discharge instructions, and tips on how to write readable and understandable instructions. Laminated cards that included tips on how to write instructions were also placed on work stations.
Figure 2Creation of discharge instruction templates in the EHR.A general discharge instruction template that was initially created and tested in the EHR (Figure 2) included text written below the 7th grade and employed 14 point font, bolded words for emphasis, and lists with bullet points. Asterisks were used to indicate where providers needed to include patient-specific information. The sections included in the general template were informed by feedback from providers and parents prior to testing, parents on the improvement team, and parents of patients admitted to our satellite campus. The sections reflect components critical to successful postdischarge care: discharge diagnosis and its brief description, postdischarge care information, new medications, signs and symptoms that would warrant escalation of care to the patient’s primary care provider or the ED, and follow-up instructions and contact information for the patent’s primary care doctor.
While the general template was an important first step, the content relied heavily on free text by providers, which could still lead to instructions written at a high reading level. Thus, disease-specific discharge instruction templates were created with prepopulated information that was written at a reading level at or below 7th grade level (Figure 2). The diseases were prioritized based on the most common diagnoses on our HM service. Each template included information under each of the subheadings noted in the general template. Twelve disease-specific templates were tested and ultimately embedded in the EHR; the general template remained for use when the discharge diagnosis was not covered by a disease-specific template.
