Difficulties in giving fully informed consent

Using Technology-Supported Transfer of Care Systems: Informing Good Practice Recommendations

The Discharge Medicines Review (DMR) referral system, Refer-to-Pharmacy (RTP), PharmOutcomes and Help for Harry are UK transfer of care systems that aim to reduce the risks associated with hospital discharge. These systems use technology to facilitate the transmission of discharge information to community pharmacy, allowing community pharmacists to provide an adherence-support service. Despite the evidence that these systems benefit patient safety, there is a paucity of literature on their use. This study aimed to describe, compare and contrast these systems to highlight areas that could inform good practice recommendations. A rapid literature review was completed, and from the twenty-six sources of literature that were synthesised, three themes were identified for further exploration in semi-structured interviews with key informants: implementation, system attributes and stakeholder engagement. The key informants were purposively sampled for their role in the development and/or strategic implementation of each transfer of care system (n = 4). Audio recordings were transcribed ad verbatim and analysed both deductively and inductively. One interview was undertaken for each of the DMR, RTP and PharmOutcomes systems. Although all systems shared the same aim, differences were identified such as automated feedback for referrals, marketing strategies and practitioner accountability. Good practice recommendations suggested in this study could be applied to the future development of such systems.

'Never heard of it'- understanding the public's lack of awareness of a new electronic patient record

BACKGROUND

The introduction of electronic patient records that are accessible by multiple providers raises security issues and requires informed consent - or at the very least, an opportunity to opt out. Introduction of the Summary Care Record (SCR) (a centrally stored electronic summary of a patient's medical record) in pilot sites in the UK was associated with low awareness, despite an intensive public information programme that included letters, posters, leaflets, and road shows.

AIM

To understand why the public information programme had limited impact and to learn lessons for future programmes.

METHODS

Linguistic and communications analysis of components of the programme, contextualized within a wider mixed-method case study of the introduction of the SCR in pilot sites. Theoretical insights from linguistics and communication studies were applied.

RESULTS

The context of the SCR pilots and the linked information programme created inherent challenges which were partially but not fully overcome by the efforts of campaigners. Much effort was put into designing the content of a mail merge letter, but less attention was given to its novelty, linguistic style, and rhetorical appeal. Many recipients viewed this letter as junk mail or propaganda and discarded it unread. Other components of the information programme were characterized by low visibility, partly because only restricted areas were participating in the pilot. Relatively little use was made of interpersonal communication channels.

CONCLUSION

Despite ethical and legal imperatives, informed consent for the introduction of shared electronic records may be difficult to achieve through public information campaigns. Success may be more likely if established principles of effective mass and interpersonal communication are applied.