Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

Improving discharge summaries from hospital with a brief recommendation text box: results from a nationwide survey

Thorbjørn H Mikkelsen, Jesper B Nielsen, Maria M Storsveen and Jens Søndergaard
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (4): BJGPO.2024.0046. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0046
Thorbjørn H Mikkelsen
1 Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Thorbjørn H Mikkelsen
  • For correspondence: thmikkelsen@health.sdu.dk
Jesper B Nielsen
1 Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jesper B Nielsen
Maria M Storsveen
1 Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Maria M Storsveen
Jens Søndergaard
1 Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jens Søndergaard
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1. Characteristics of responding GPs (n = 310) compared with all Danish GPs
    Population of Danish GPsSample of GPsResponding GPs
    n % n % n %
    Sex
    Male1499433404314446
    Female1974574585716654
    Geographic region
    The Capital Region of Denmark106431248318828
    The Central Denmark Region4411387114113
    The North Denmark Region81924200257925
    Region Zealand85125197257825
    Region of Southern Denmark2989668248
    Age, years
    30–40320981103010
    41–501421413164011938
    51–6098928229299531
    61–7066019154196120
    >7083218252
    • View popup
    Table 2. The distribution of software in general practice clinics and among the GPs who have answered the questionnaire
    Distribution of software among Danish GP clinicsDistribution of software among responding GPs
    Software used by the clinics n % n %
    MDS 17254213343
    MDS 2436258728
    MDS 320112279
    MDS 4239144615
    MDS 5, MDS 6, MDS 7a 1147279
    MDS 81000
    • aMDS 5, MDS 6, MDS 7 are merged owing to few users.

    • MDS = marked discharge summaries.

    • View popup
    Table 3. Usability of the recommendation text box
    QuestionTotally agree, n (%)Partly agree, n (%)Neither agree nor disagree, n (%)Partially disagree, n (%)Totally disagree, n (%)n
    The recommendation text box is easy to find124 (40)98 (32)37 (12)29 (9)22 (7)310
    The recommendation text box provides brief and precise information about recommended follow-up63 (20)134 (43)60 (19)39 (13)14 (5)310
    • View popup
    Table 4. The recommendation field is easy to find
    Prevalence'Totally agree' or 'Partly agree''Neither agree nor disagree', 'Partially disagree', or 'Totally disagree'OR (95% CI)aAdjusted OR (95% CI)b
    n (%) n (%) P value P value
    Geographical region
    The Central Denmark Region7858 (74.4%)20 (25.6%)11
    The Capital Region of Denmark8861 (69.3%)27 (30.7%)0.78 (0.39 to 1.54)0.4731.01 (0.48 to 2.14)0.982
    The North Denmark Region2419 (79.2%)5 (20.8%)1.31 (0.43 to 3.98)0.6331.30 (0.38 to 4.42)0.675
    Region Zealand4121 (51.2%)20 (48.8%) 0.36 (0.16 to 0.80)* 0.012* 0.46 (0.20 to 1.04)0.063
    Region of Southern Denmark7963 (79.7%)16 (20.3%)1.36 (0.64 to 2.87)0.4241.42 (0.65 to 3.08)0.378
    Software used by the clinics
    MDS 1133108 (81.2%)25 (18.8%)11
    MDS 28757 (65.5%)30 (34.5%) 0.44 (0.24 to 0.82)* 0.010* 0.44 (0.23 to 0.84)* 0.014*
    MDS 32715 (55.6%)12 (44.4%) 0.29 (0.12 to 0.70)* 0.006* 0.34 (0.13 to 0.92)* 0.033*
    MDS 44631 (67.4%)15 (32.6%)0.48 (0.22 to 1.02)0.0560.47 (0.20 to 1.09)0.078
    MDS 5, MDS 6, MDS 7c 1711 (64.7%)6 (35.3%)0.42 (0.14 to 1.26)0.1220.53 (0.16 to 1.73)0.296
    Sex
    Male14496 (66.7%)48 (33.3%)11
    Female166126 (75.9%)40 (24.1%)1.57 (0.96 to 2.59)0.0731.52 (0.89 to 2.57)0.124
    Age, years
    ≤55194148 (76.3%)46 (23.7%)11
    >5511674 (63.8%)42 (36.2%) 0.55 (0.33 to 0.91)* 0.019* 0.59 (0.34 to 1.03)0.062
    Type of clinic
    Multid 235169 (71.9%)66 (28.1%)11
    Soloe 7553 (70.7%)22 (29.3%)0.94 (0.53 to 1.67)0.8351.46 (0.73 to 2.92)0.289
    One or more nurses employed in the practice?
    Yes275199 (72.4%)76 (27.6%)11
    No3523 (65.7%)12 (34.3%)0.73 (0.35 to 1.55)0.4130.68 (0.30 to 1.55)0.360
    • aCrude prevalence ratio is the unadjusted prevalence ratio. bAdjusted logistic regression. Adjusted for geographic region, software used by the clinics, sex, age group, type of clinic and whether the clinic employs one or more nurses. cMDS 5, MDS 6, MDS 7 are merged owing to few users. dPartnership clinics. eSolo, shared single and groups of solo GPs sharing clinic facilities.

    • MDS = marked discharge summaries.

    • Bold and asterisked = statistically significant.

    • View popup
    Table 5. The recommendation text box provides brief and precise information about recommended follow-up
    Prev.'Totally agree' or 'Partly agree''Neither agree nor disagree', 'Partially disagree', or 'Totally disagree'OR (95% CI)aP valueAdjusted OR (95% CI)bP value
    n (%) n (%)
    Geographical region
    The Central Denmark Region7850 (64.1%)28 (35.9%)11
    The Capital Region of Denmark8855 (62.5%)33 (37.5%)0.93 (0.50 to 1.76)0.8310.99 (0.50 to 1.95)0.970
    The North Denmark Region2414 (58.3%)10 (41.7%)0.78 (0.31 to 2.00)0.6100.75 (0.27 to 2.08)0.577
    Region Zealand4121 (51.2%)20 (48.8%)0.59 (0.27 to 1.27)0.1760.65 (0.30 to 1.43)0.288
    Region of Southern Denmark7957 (72.2%)22 (27.8%)1.45 (0.74 to 2.85)0.2811.48 (0.74 to 2.95)0.265
    Software used by the clinics
    MDS 113391 (68.4%)42 (31.6%)11
    MDS 28753 (60.9%)34 (39.1%)0.72 (0.41 to 1.27)0.2540.74 (0.41 to 1.34)0.319
    MDS 32715 (55.6%)12 (44.4%)0.58 (0.25 to 1.34)0.2010.60 (0.24 to 1.52)0.281
    MDS 44629 (63.0%)17 (37.0%)0.79 (0.39 to 1.59)0.5050.79 (0.36 to 1.73)0.555
    MDS 5, MDS 6, MDS 7c 179 (52.9%)8 (47.1%)0.52 (0.19 to 1.44)0.2090.56 (0.19 to 1.65)0.292
    Sex
    Male14479 (54.9%)65 (45.1%)11
    Female166118 (71.1%)48 (28.9%) 2.02 (1.26 to 3.24)* 0.003* 2.00 (1.23 to 3.25)* 0.005*
    Age (years of age)
    ≤55194126 (64.9%)68 (35.1%)11
    >5511671 (61.2%)45 (38.8%)0.85 (0.53 to 1.37)0.5090.93 (0.55 to 1.57)0.785
    Type of clinic
    Multid 235148 (63.0%)87 (37.0%)11
    Soloe 7549 (65.3%)26 (34.7%)1.11 (0.64 to 1.91)0.7131.47 (0.76 to 2.86)0.257
    One or more nurses employed in the clinic?
    Yes275175 (63.6%)100 (36.4%)11
    No3522 (62.9%)13 (37.1%)0.97 (0.47 to 2.01)0.9280.86 (0.39 to 1.86)0.697
    • aCrude prevalence ratio is the unadjusted prevalence ratio. bAdjusted logistic regression. Adjusted for geographic region, software used by the clinics, sex, age group, type of clinic, and whether the clinic employs one or more nurses. cMDS 5, MDS 6 and MDS 7 are merged owing to few users. dPartnership clinics. eSolo, shared single and groups of solo GPs sharing clinic facilities.

    • MDS = marked discharge summaries.

    • Bold and asterisked = statistically significant.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 8, Issue 4
December 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Improving discharge summaries from hospital with a brief recommendation text box: results from a nationwide survey
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Improving discharge summaries from hospital with a brief recommendation text box: results from a nationwide survey
Thorbjørn H Mikkelsen, Jesper B Nielsen, Maria M Storsveen, Jens Søndergaard
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (4): BJGPO.2024.0046. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0046

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Improving discharge summaries from hospital with a brief recommendation text box: results from a nationwide survey
Thorbjørn H Mikkelsen, Jesper B Nielsen, Maria M Storsveen, Jens Søndergaard
BJGP Open 2024; 8 (4): BJGPO.2024.0046. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0046
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • Patient safety
  • general practice
  • surveys and questionnaires

More in this TOC Section

  • Sex differences in the prescription of antihypertensive medications in primary care patients: an observational study
  • Evaluating ChatGPT for converting clinic letters into patient-friendly language: a quantitative study
  • Community-based cardiovascular risk assessment using the CardisioTM AI test: a prospective cohort study
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2025 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795