A randomized single-blind evaluation of a discharge teaching book for pediatric patients with burns. Standardized instructions: do they improve communication of discharge information from the emergency department?
To evaluate the influence of a modular, multidisciplinary, pediatric burn discharge book on burn-care-related knowledge and satisfaction of caregivers, we studied children less than 17 years of age admitted with an acute thermal injury to the pediatric burn unit of a large, tertiary care hospital in Winnipeg, Canada over a 32 month period. Demographic characteristics of the population are similar to published profiles of other pediatric burn units with the exception that North American Indian (NAI) families were disproportionately admitted, with 59 out of the 123 (48%) admissions from a geographic area that has less than 15% NAIs. We randomly assigned the families to receive discharge instructions with the book (intervention group) or routine discharge teaching without the book (comparison group). Knowledge levels of burn care and satisfaction with discharge teaching of caregivers were evaluated with a questionnaire administered in single-blind fashion at the first outpatient follow-up visit. Sixty-two families received the book and 61 families received standard discharge teaching. Bivariate analysis showed greater knowledge in the intervention group, with an average score (range, 0.0 to 1.0) of 0.79 +/- 0.15 versus 0.73 +/- 0.15 in the comparison group (p < 0.05). We did not observe this positive effect of the book when we analyzed NAI families separately: 28 families instructed with the book scored 0.68 +/- 0.14 versus 0.63 +/- 0.13 in 31 families provided with routine teaching (p = 0.18). Stepwise multiple-regression analysis found that the influence of the book was limited to families with children who sustained scald burns (p < 0.05). Factors negatively related to the knowledge levels of caregivers (p < 0.05) were being of NAI origin and being NAI with no safety devices in the home. A positive correlation (p < 0.05) was found with having English as the first language, having a child with more extensive burns, having a younger age of the child with burns, and having fewer children in the home. In conclusion, we found that the discharge book improved the burn-care-related knowledge of caregivers. However, other factors, particularly ethnic and language background, were of greater influence. To determine whether standardized instructions enhance communication of discharge information, we provided 197 parents of children in whom otitis media was diagnosed with one of three types of instruction at the time of discharge from a pediatric emergency department: (1) instruction by individual housestaff and medical students after consultation with an attending physician (control group); (2) standardized verbal instructions given by housestaff and students trained in their use (verbal group); or (3) the same instructions given to the verbal group, together with a type-written copy of the information to take home (verbal + written group). Prior to leaving the emergency department and, again, by phone, 1 and 3 days later, parents were questioned concerning the prescribed medication's name, dose, frequency, and duration of administration (medication data), three signs of improvement, and eight signs indicating the need for medical advice (worrisome signs). The mean percentage of correct responses per parent in each group was computed for each information category. Both at exit interview and at follow-up, parents receiving either form of standardized instructions showed significantly greater knowledge of information related to their child's illness than did controls. Information regarding medication data was more likely to be communicated to parents in all groups than were signs of improvement or worrisome signs. The addition of written instructions to standardized verbal instructions did not improve parental recall of discharge information.
This review recommends the use of both verbal and written health information when communicating about care issues with patients and/or significant others on discharge from hospital to home. The combination of verbal and written health information enables the provision of standardised care information to patients and/or significant others, which appears to improve knowledge and satisfaction. Many of our objectives could not be addressed in this review due to lack of trials which met the review's inclusion criteria. There is therefore scope for future research to investigate the effects of providing verbal and written health information on readmission rates, recovery time, complication rates, costs of health care, consumers' confidence level, stress and anxiety and adherence to recommended treatment and staff training in the delivery of verbal and written information. In addition there are other factors which impact on the effectiveness of information provided that were not considered in this review but are worthy of a separate systematic review, such as the impact of patient and/or significant others being involved in the development of the written information and cultural issues around development and provision of information. Due to concerns about literacy levels for some population groups, other systematic reviews should also focus on other modes of delivery of information besides the written format.