Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015 Dec;65(641):e829-37.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp15X687877.

Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports

Affiliations
Review

Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports

Huw Williams et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Discharge from hospital presents significant risks to patient safety, with up to one in five patients experiencing adverse events within 3 weeks of leaving hospital.

Aim: To describe the frequency and types of patient safety incidents associated with discharge from secondary to primary care, and commonly described contributory factors to identify recommendations for practice.

Design and setting: A mixed methods analysis of 598 patient safety incident reports in England and Wales related to 'Discharge' from the National Reporting and Learning System.

Method: Detailed data coding (with 20% double-coding), data summaries generated using descriptive statistical analysis, and thematic analysis of special-case sample of reports. Incident type, contributory factors, type, and level of harm were described, informing recommendations for future practice.

Results: A total of 598 eligible reports were analysed. The four main themes were: errors in discharge communication (n = 151; 54% causing harm); errors in referrals to community care (n = 136; 73% causing harm); errors in medication (n = 97; 87% causing harm); and lack of provision of care adjuncts such as dressings (n = 62; 94% causing harm). Common contributory factors were staff factors (not following referral protocols); and organisational factors (lack of clear guidelines or inefficient processes). Improvement opportunities include developing and testing electronic discharge methods with agreed minimum information requirements and unified referrals systems to community care providers; and promoting a safety culture with 'safe discharge' checklists, discharge coordinators, and family involvement.

Conclusion: Significant harm was evident due to deficits in the discharge process. Interventions in this area need to be evaluated and learning shared widely.

Keywords: adverse events; discharge; harm; patient safety; primary care; safety incident reports.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Cresswell KM, Panesar SS, Salvilla SA, et al. Global research priorities to better understand the burden of iatrogenic harm in primary care: an international Delphi exercise. PLoS Med. 2013;10(11):e1001554. - PMC - PubMed
    1. de Wet C, O’Donnell C, Bowie P. Developing a preliminary ‘never event’ list for general practice using consensus-building methods. Br J Gen Pract. 2014 doi: 10.3399/bjgp14X677536. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vincent C, Aylin P, Franklin BD, et al. Is health care getting safer? BMJ. 2008;337:a2426. - PubMed
    1. NHS England Patient safety alert: risks arising from breakdown and failure to act on communication during handover at the time of discharge from secondary care. 2014 Aug 29; http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/psa-imp-saf-of-disc... (accessed 3 Nov 2015).
    1. Health and Social Care Information Centre . Hospital episode statistics, admitted patient care, England – 2012–2013. Leeds: HSCIC; 2013. http://www.hscic.gov.uk/searchcatalogue?productid=13264&q=title%3a%22Hos... (accessed 3 Nov 2015).

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources