Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBiringer, Eva Aaker
dc.contributor.authorHelgeland, J.
dc.contributor.authorHellesen, H.B.
dc.contributor.authorAssmus, Jörg
dc.contributor.authorHartveit, Miriam
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-03T12:57:36Z
dc.date.available2024-04-03T12:57:36Z
dc.date.created2023-06-28T08:45:56Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.issn2399-6641
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3124692
dc.description.abstractBackground The ‘discharge letter’ is the mandatory written report sent from specialists in the specialist services to general practitioners (GPs) on patient discharge. Clear recommendations from relevant stakeholders for contents of discharge letters and instruments to measure the quality of discharge letters in mental healthcare are needed. The objectives were to (1) detect which information relevant stakeholders defined as important to include in discharge letters from mental health specialist services, (2) develop a checklist to measure the quality of discharge letters and (3) test the psychometric properties of the checklist. Methods We used a stepwise multimethod stakeholder-centred approach. Group interviews with GPs, mental health specialists and patient representatives defined 68 information items with 10 consensus-based thematic headings relevant to include in high-quality discharge letters. Information items rated as highly important by GPs (n=50) were included in the Quality of Discharge information-Mental Health (QDis-MH) checklist. The 26-item checklist was tested by GPs (n=18) and experts in healthcare improvement or health services research (n=15). Psychometric properties were assessed using estimates of intrascale consistency and linear mixed effects models. Inter-rater and test–retest reliability were assessed using Gwet’s agreement coefficient (Gwet’s AC1) and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results The QDis-MH checklist had satisfactory intrascale consistency. Inter-rater reliability was poor to moderate, and test–retest reliability was moderate. In descriptive analyses, mean checklist scores were higher in the category of discharge letters defined as ‘good’ than in ‘medium’ or ’poor’ letters, but differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions GPs, mental health specialists and patient representatives defined 26 information items relevant to include in discharge letters in mental healthcare. The QDis-MH checklist is valid and feasible. However, when using the checklist, raters should be trained and the number of raters kept to a minimum due to questionable inter-rater reliability.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBMJen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleDevelopment and testing of the QDis-MH checklist for discharge letters from specialised mental healthcare: A stakeholder-centred studyen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2023 The Author(s)en_US
dc.source.articlenumbere002036en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002036
dc.identifier.cristin2158886
dc.source.journalBMJ Open Qualityen_US
dc.identifier.citationBMJ Open Quality. 2023, 12 (2), e002036.en_US
dc.source.volume12en_US
dc.source.issue2en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal