Impact of patient information leaflets on doctor-patient communication in the context of acute conditions: a prospective, controlled, before-after study in two French emergency departments

Mélanie Sustersic, Marisa Tissot, Julie Tyrant, Aurelie Gauchet, Alison Foote, Céline Vermorel, Jean Luc Bosson, Mélanie Sustersic, Marisa Tissot, Julie Tyrant, Aurelie Gauchet, Alison Foote, Céline Vermorel, Jean Luc Bosson

Abstract

Objective: In the context of acute conditions seen in an emergency department, where communication may be difficult, patient information leaflets (PILs) could improve doctor-patient communication (DPC) and may have an impact on other outcomes of the consultation. Our objective was to assess the impact of PILs on DPC, patient satisfaction and adherence, and on patient and doctor behaviours.

Design: Prospective, controlled, before-after trial between November 2013 and June 2015.

Setting: Two French emergency departments.

Participants: Adults and adolescents >15 years diagnosed with ankle sprain or an infection (diverticulitis, infectious colitis, pyelonephritis, pneumonia or prostatitis).

Intervention: Physicians in the intervention group gave patients a PIL about their condition along with an oral explanation.

Main outcome measures: 7-10 days later, patients were contacted by phone to answer questionnaires. Results were derived from questions scored using a 4-point Likert scale.

Main findings: Analysis of the 324 patients showed that PILs improved the mean DPC score (range: 13-52), with 46 (42-49) for 168 patients with PILs vs 44 (38-48) for 156 patients without PILs (p<0.01). The adjusted OR for good communication (having a score >35/52) was 2.54 (1.27 to 5.06). The overall satisfaction and adherence scores did not show significant differences. In contrast, satisfaction with healthcare professionals and timing of medication intake were improved with PILs. The overall satisfaction score improved significantly on per-protocol analysis. When using PILs, doctors prescribed fewer drugs and more examinations (radiology, biology, appointment with a specialist); the need for a new medical consultation for the same pathology was reduced from 32.1% to 17.9% (OR 0.46 [0.27 to 0.77]), particularly revisiting the emergency department.

Conclusion: In emergency departments, PILs given by doctors improve DPC, increase patients' satisfaction with healthcare professionals, reduce the number of emergency reconsultations for the same pathology and modify the doctor's behaviour.

Trial registration number: NCT02246361.

Keywords: Doctor-Patient Communication; Patient Information Leaflet; acute condition; adherence; doctor behavior; emergency department; patient behavior; satisfaction.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient flow chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Doctor–patient communication (DPC) scores.

References

    1. Oxford. In: Oxford Dictionaries [Internet]. 2015th ed. Oxford University Press.
    1. Hirshon Jon Mark. Health systems and services: the role of acute care [Internet]. World Health Organization 2013.
    1. Coiera EW, Jayasuriya RA, Hardy J, et al. . Communication loads on clinical staff in the emergency department. Med J Aust 2002;176:415–8.
    1. Slade D, Scheeres H, Manidis M, et al. . Emergency communication: the discursive challenges facing emergency clinicians and patients in hospital emergency departments. Discourse & Communication 2008;2:271–98. 10.1177/1750481308091910
    1. Ackermann S, Bingisser MB, Heierle A, et al. . Discharge communication in the emergency department: physicians underestimate the time needed. Swiss Med Wkly 2012;142:1–6. 10.4414/smw.2012.13588
    1. Samuels-Kalow ME, Stack AM, Porter SC. Effective discharge communication in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2012;60:152–9. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.10.023
    1. Kripalani S, Jackson AT, Schnipper JL, et al. . Promoting effective transitions of care at hospital discharge: a review of key issues for hospitalists. J Hosp Med 2007;2:314–23. 10.1002/jhm.228
    1. Simmons S, Sharp B, Fowler J, et al. . Mind the (knowledge) gap: the effect of a communication instrument on emergency department patients’ comprehension of and satisfaction with care. Patient Educ Couns 2015;98:257–62. 10.1016/j.pec.2014.10.020
    1. Musso MW, Perret JN, Sanders T, et al. . Patients’ comprehension of their emergency department encounter: a pilot study using physician observers. Ann Emerg Med 2015;65:151–5. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.08.012
    1. Coulter A, Entwistle V, Gilbert D. Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough? BMJ 1999;318:318–22. 10.1136/bmj.318.7179.318
    1. Sustersic M, Gauchet A, Foote A, et al. . How best to use and evaluate Patient Information Leaflets given during a consultation: a systematic review of literature reviews. Health Expect 2017;20:1–12. 10.1111/hex.12487
    1. Rao JK, Anderson LA, Inui TS, et al. . Communication interventions make a difference in conversations between physicians and patients: a systematic review of the evidence. Med Care 2007;45:340–9. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000254516.04961.d5
    1. Garner M, Ning Z, Francis J. A framework for the evaluation of patient information leaflets. Health Expect 2012;15:283–94. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00665.x
    1. van der Meulen N, Jansen J, van Dulmen S, et al. . Interventions to improve recall of medical information in cancer patients: a systematic review of the literature. Psychooncology 2008;17:857–68. 10.1002/pon.1290
    1. Köpke S, Solari A, Khan F, et al. . Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Inter- net). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2014.
    1. Zapata LB, Steenland MW, Brahmi D, et al. . Patient understanding of oral contraceptive pill instructions related to missed pills: a systematic review. Contraception 2013;87:674–84. 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.08.026
    1. Kenny T, Wilson RG, Purves IN, et al. . A PIL for every ill? Patient information leaflets (PILs): a review of past, present and future use. Fam Pract 1998;15:471–9. 10.1093/fampra/15.5.471
    1. Arthur VA. Written patient information: a review of the literature. J Adv Nurs 1995;21:1081–6. 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.21061081.x
    1. Clack GB, Allen J, Cooper D, et al. . Personality differences between doctors and their patients: implications for the teaching of communication skills. Med Educ 2004;38:177–86. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2004.01752.x
    1. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang CH. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the Communication Assessment Tool. Patient Educ Couns 2007;67:333–42. 10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.005
    1. Little P, Rumsby K, Kelly J, et al. . Information leaflet and antibiotic prescribing strategies for acute lower respiratory tract infection: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;293:3029–35. 10.1001/jama.293.24.3029
    1. Laccourreye L, Werner A, Cauchois R, et al. . [Contributions and limitations of the written form during information on the risks before scheduled surgery]. Méd Droit 2008;2008:63–6.
    1. Johnson A, Sandford J. Written and verbal information versus verbal information only for patients being discharged from acute hospital settings to home: systematic review. Health Educ Res 2005;20:423–9. 10.1093/her/cyg141
    1. Forster A, Brown L, Smith J, et al. . Information provision for stroke patients and their caregivers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;11:CD001919 10.1002/14651858.CD001919.pub3
    1. Francis NA, Butler CC, Hood K, et al. . Effect of using an interactive booklet about childhood respiratory tract infections in primary care consultations on reconsulting and antibiotic prescribing: a cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2009;339:b2885 10.1136/bmj.b2885
    1. Ha JF, Longnecker N. Doctor-patient communication: a review. Ochsner J 2010;10:38–43.
    1. Sustersic M, Gauchet A, Kernou A, et al. . A scale assessing doctor-patient communication in a context of acute conditions based on a systematic review. PLoS One 2018;13:e0192306 10.1371/journal.pone.0192306
    1. Sustersic M, Meneau A, Drémont R, et al. . [Developing patient information sheets in general practice. Proposal for a methodology]. Rev Prat 2008;58:17–24.
    1. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Martin-Mola E, et al. . Minimum clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state in pain and function in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic back pain, hand osteoarthritis, and hip and knee osteoarthritis: Results from a prospective multina. Arthritis Care Res 2012;64:1699–707. 10.1002/acr.21747
    1. Eisenberg E, Murphy A, Sutcliffe K, et al. . Communication in emergency medicine: Implications for patient safety. Communication Monographs 2005;72:390–413.
    1. Grime J, Blenkinsopp A, Raynor DK, et al. . The role and value of written information for patients about individual medicines: a systematic review. Health Expect 2007;10:286–98. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00454.x
    1. Coudeyre E, Givron P, Vanbiervliet W, et al. . [The role of an information booklet or oral information about back pain in reducing disability and fear-avoidance beliefs among patients with subacute and chronic low back pain. A randomized controlled trial in a rehabilitation unit]. Ann Readapt Med Phys 2006;49:600–8. 10.1016/j.annrmp.2006.05.003
    1. Taylor C, Benger JR. Patient satisfaction in emergency medicine. Emerg Med J 2004;21:528–32. 10.1136/emj.2002.003723
    1. Arnold J, Goodacre S, Bath P, et al. . Information sheets for patients with acute chest pain: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2009;338:b541 10.1136/bmj.b541
    1. Little P, Dorward M, Warner G, et al. . Randomised controlled trial of effect of leaflets to empower patients in consultations in primary care. BMJ 2004;328:441 10.1136/bmj.37999.716157.44
    1. Sustersic M, Jeannet E, Cozon-Rein L, et al. . Impact of information leaflets on behavior of patients with gastroenteritis or tonsillitis: a cluster randomized trial in French primary care. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:25–31. 10.1007/s11606-012-2164-8
    1. de Bont EG, Alink M, Falkenberg FC, et al. . Patient information leaflets to reduce antibiotic use and reconsultation rates in general practice: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007612 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007612
    1. Altiner A, Brockmann S, Sielk M, et al. . Reducing antibiotic prescriptions for acute cough by motivating GPs to change their attitudes to communication and empowering patients: a cluster-randomized intervention study. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007;60:638–44. 10.1093/jac/dkm254
    1. Vaillancourt S, Seaton MB, Schull MJ, et al. . Patients’ perspectives on outcomes of care after discharge from the emergency department: a qualitative study. Ann Emerg Med 2017;70:648–58. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.05.034
    1. Thiese MS. Observational and interventional study design types; an overview. Biochem Med 2014;24:199–210. 10.11613/BM.2014.022
    1. Moe J, Kirkland SW, Rawe E, et al. . Effectiveness of Interventions to Decrease Emergency Department Visits by Adult Frequent Users: A Systematic Review. Acad Emerg Med 2017;24:40–52. 10.1111/acem.13060

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다