Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T13:44:45.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of a hospital audit on psychiatrists' letters to general practitioners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Premal J. Shah  and
Ian Pullen
Premal J. Shah*
Affiliation:
Royal Edinburgh Hospital, 151 Morningside Place, Edinburgh, EH 10 5HF
Ian Pullen
Affiliation:
Dingleton Hospital, Melrose, Roxburghshire TD6 9HN
*
∗Correspondence
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The quality of written communication between psychiatrists and general practitioners has become increasingly important, with the introduction of the Access to Health Records Act as well as with demands placed by the purchasers of psychiatric services. We investigated if a hospital-based audit could be used to monitor the quality of written communications with general practitioners, and if ‘closing the audit loop’ could improve the standards. We found that audit may have helped improve standards, particularly in making letters less potentially offensive and easier to read by non-psychiatrists. A method of measuring the quality of letters is described.

Type
Audit
Information
Psychiatric Bulletin , Volume 19 , Issue 9 , September 1995 , pp. 544 - 547
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1995

References

Access to Health Records Act 1990. HMSO.Google Scholar
Butler, R. E. & Nicholls, D. E. (1993) The Access to Health Records Act: what difference does it make? Psychiatric Bulletin, 17, 204–206.Google Scholar
Crichton, P., Douzenis, A., Leggatt, C., et al (1992) Are psychiatric case-notes offensive? Psychiatric Bulletin, 16, 675–677.Google Scholar
Department of Health (1989) Working for Patients. Medical Audit Working Paper 6. (Cmnd 555). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Margo, J. L. (1982) Letters from psychiatrists to general practitioners. Bulletin of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, 6, 139–141.Google Scholar
Open Forum, Education Committee (1991) Medical audit: basic principles and current methods. Psychiatric Bulletin, 15, 21–25.Google Scholar
Priest, R. G. (1986) Data Protection Act: Subject to Personal Health Information (DA 8523): DHSS Consultation Paper. Psychiatric Bulletin, 15, 21–25.Google Scholar
Pullen, I. M. & Yellowlees, A. J. (1985) Is communication improving between general practitioners and psychiatrists? British Medical Journal, 290, 31–33.Google Scholar
Royal College of Psychiatrists (1992) Access to Health Records Act 1990. College guidance. Psychiatric Bulletin, 16, 114–116.Google Scholar
Yellowlees, A. J. & Pullen, I. M. (1984) Communication between psychiatrists and geneal practitioners – what sort of letter should psychiatrists write? Health Bulletin, 42, 285–296.Google Scholar
Young, R. C. Jr., Rachal, R. E. & Morgan, A. L. (1991) Maximising communication skills in graduate and postgraduate health-care education through medical writing. Journal of the National Medical Association, 83, 691–696.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.