Original Article

Signed, Sealed, Delivered: Increasing Patient Notification of Test Results in an Internal Medicine Resident Continuity Clinic

Authors: William Benton, MD, Erin D. Snyder, MD, Carlos A. Estrada, MD, MS, Teresa J. Bryan, MD

Abstract

Objectives: Informing patients of their test results is an important patient safety issue, yet many physicians perform dismally in this regard. Residents often face additional barriers to communicating test results to patients. We wanted to determine whether streamlining the notification process, communicating expectations, and having residents audit their performance would increase result notification rates.

Methods: We used a quasi-experimental design, and a single-group before-and-after intervention. Our multifold intervention consisted of development and standardization of a notification process in the electronic medical record, an education component, and a self-audit component. During a 15-minute session, we educated residents on the use of the new process. We also restated expectations regarding notifying patients of their results. Residents audited their own charts for a period before the intervention and during a second, postintervention period. An independent review of notification rates took place simultaneously as well as during an additional period several months later.

Results: In total, 87 residents were eligible for participation. All 87 completed the project, giving a 100% participation rate. Resident-reported laboratory test notification rates increased from 16% to 91%; other test result rates increased from 33% to 84%. The three independent reviews showed laboratory test notification rates increased from 18.5% to 71.7% to 87.1%, and notification of other test results increased from 23.5% to 66.7% to 91.7%.

Conclusions: Baseline rates of notification for diagnostic tests results were low, but streamlining the notification process, clearly stating expectations for using it, and using resident self-audit can improve notification rates.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Callen JL, Westbrook JI, Georgiou A, et al. Failure to follow-up test results for ambulatory patients: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1334-1348.
2. Hickner J, Graham DG, Elder NC, et al. Testing process errors and their harms and consequences reported from family medicine practices: a study of the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. Qual Saf Health Care 2008;17:194-200.
3. Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:488-496.
4. Singh H, Vij MS. Eight recommendations for policies for communicating abnormal test results. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2010;36:226-232.
5. Casalino LP, Dunham D, Chin MH, et al. Frequency of failure to inform patients of clinically significant outpatient test results. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1123-1129.
6. Singh H, Wilson L, Reis B, et al. Ten strategies to improve management of abnormal test result alerts in the electronic health record. J Patient Saf 2010;6:121-123.
7. Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Uman JE, et al. Patient notification and follow-up of abnormal test results. A physician survey. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:327-331.
8. Singh H, Spitzmueller C, Petersen NJ, et al. Primary care practitioners' views on test result management in EHR-enabled health systems: a national survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:727-735.
9. Ray A, Jones D, Palamara K, et al. Improving ambulatory training in internal medicine: X + Y (or why not?). J Gen Intern Med 2016;31:1519-1522.
10. Hom J, Richman I, Chen JH, et al. Fulfilling outpatient medicine responsibilities during internal medicine residency: a quantitative study of housestaff participation with between visit tasks. BMC Med Educ 2016;16:139.
11. Tudor Car L, Papachristou N, Bull A, et al. Clinician-identified problems and solutions for delayed diagnosis in primary care: a PRIORITIZE study. BMC Fam Pract 2016;17:131.
12. Staton LJ, Kraemer SM, Patel S, et al. Peer chart audits: a tool to meet Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency in practice-based learning and improvement. Implement Sci 2007;2:24.
13. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(6):CD000259.
14. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, American Board of Internal Medicine. The internal medicine milestone project. https://www.abim.org/~/media/ABIM%20Public/Files/pdf/milestones/internal-medicine-milestones-project.pdf. Accessed June 26, 2018.
15. Kuperman EF, Tobin K, Kraschnewski JL. Comparing resident self-report to chart audits for quality improvement projects: accurate reflection or cherry-picking? J Grad Med Educ 2014;6:675-679.
16. Brennan MB, Barocas JA, Crnich CJ, et al. “Oops! I forgot HIV”: resident physician self-audits and universal HIV screening. J Infect Public Health 2015;8:161-169.
17. Boggan JC, Swaminathan A, Thomas S, et al. Improving timely resident follow-up and communication of results in ambulatory clinics utilizing a web-based audit and feedback module. J Grad Med Educ 2017;9:195-200.