Key Components of Traditional Consultation Letters and Their Relevance to Electronic Consultation Replies: A Systematic Review

摘要

Background: Effective communication between primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists plays a key role in providing high-quality patient care. A high-quality referral process should involve referral letters containing all information that is necessary to support shared care between primary and specialty care. Introduction: There is no consensus on the optimal components of specialist-to-PCP communication after a face-to-face patient encounter or in the context of the emerging field of electronic consultations (eConsult). In this study, we aimed at synthesizing the evidence on key components of a traditional consultation letter and at determining whether they can be applied to eConsult replies. Methods: We conducted a systematic review by using a narrative synthesis approach. We searched Pubmed and Embase from inception to January/March 2016 (English). Included studies focused on features of specialists' responses to PCPs. We extracted components of a consultation letter that were identified to be of importance to PCPs and attempted to relate their applicability to eConsult replies. Results: The search revealed 744 potentially relevant citations, of which 65 were deemed eligible for full-text review. Forty-one papers were excluded on full-text review, resulting in 24 studies included in the final synthesis. Important components of consultation letters that were applicable to eConsults included: answering a direct question, providing a diagnosis, providing treatment options, providing education around the case, providing a prognosis, and arranging follow-up, clarity, and organization. Key differences between traditional and eConsult replies included the history and physical investigations, impression, plan, and rationale for plan/education. Conclusion: When seeking to improve the quality of specialist reply letters in both traditional and eConsult replies, one should consider differences in how information is collected and accessed, the role of each provider, and factors that impact specialist-to-PCP communication.