Should patients still be copied into their letters? A rapid review

Emma Harris, Priyanka Rob, Janet Underwood, Peter Knapp, Felicity Astin

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

2 Citations (Scopus)
38 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective
To systematically identify, synthesise and evaluate the strength of the international evidence on copy letter practice.

Methods
A systematic search identified original research studies on copy letters. Searches were limited by date and language as permitted in rapid review methods guidance. Article screening, data extraction and strength of evidence assessment were completed independently by multiple authors.

Results
Thirty-seven studies were included. There was a lack of information about copy letter content. Many patients report being satisfied with copy letters, understand them and find them useful. However, there is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to suggest that copy letters increased patient understanding or improved physical or psychological health outcomes. Many letters were written at a level which would make them inaccessible to patients with low health literacy. The strength of evidence was either “emerging” or “acceptable” practice for most studies (n = 30).

Conclusion
There is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to demonstrate the benefits of copy letters as described in health policy.

Practice Implications
Personalising letters and using lay rather than medical terms appears to be useful for improving copy letter readability. Further research is required to explore this, especially in people with low health literacy levels
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2065-2082
Number of pages18
JournalPatient Education and Counseling
Volume101
Issue number12
Early online date25 Jun 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2018

Fingerprint

Health Literacy
Health Policy
Research
Language
Psychology
Health

Cite this

Harris, Emma ; Rob, Priyanka ; Underwood, Janet ; Knapp, Peter ; Astin, Felicity. / Should patients still be copied into their letters? A rapid review. In: Patient Education and Counseling. 2018 ; Vol. 101, No. 12. pp. 2065-2082.
@article{7946b7523faa43b5b0b98939d052faae,
title = "Should patients still be copied into their letters? A rapid review",
abstract = "ObjectiveTo systematically identify, synthesise and evaluate the strength of the international evidence on copy letter practice.MethodsA systematic search identified original research studies on copy letters. Searches were limited by date and language as permitted in rapid review methods guidance. Article screening, data extraction and strength of evidence assessment were completed independently by multiple authors.ResultsThirty-seven studies were included. There was a lack of information about copy letter content. Many patients report being satisfied with copy letters, understand them and find them useful. However, there is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to suggest that copy letters increased patient understanding or improved physical or psychological health outcomes. Many letters were written at a level which would make them inaccessible to patients with low health literacy. The strength of evidence was either “emerging” or “acceptable” practice for most studies (n = 30).ConclusionThere is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to demonstrate the benefits of copy letters as described in health policy.Practice ImplicationsPersonalising letters and using lay rather than medical terms appears to be useful for improving copy letter readability. Further research is required to explore this, especially in people with low health literacy levels",
keywords = "Copy letters, Doctor and patient communication, Patient discharge summaries, Patient education, Patient letters, Patient satisfaction, Person centred care",
author = "Emma Harris and Priyanka Rob and Janet Underwood and Peter Knapp and Felicity Astin",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2018.06.014",
language = "English",
volume = "101",
pages = "2065--2082",
journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",
issn = "0738-3991",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "12",

}

Should patients still be copied into their letters? A rapid review. / Harris, Emma; Rob, Priyanka; Underwood, Janet; Knapp, Peter; Astin, Felicity.

In: Patient Education and Counseling, Vol. 101, No. 12, 01.12.2018, p. 2065-2082.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Should patients still be copied into their letters? A rapid review

AU - Harris, Emma

AU - Rob, Priyanka

AU - Underwood, Janet

AU - Knapp, Peter

AU - Astin, Felicity

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - ObjectiveTo systematically identify, synthesise and evaluate the strength of the international evidence on copy letter practice.MethodsA systematic search identified original research studies on copy letters. Searches were limited by date and language as permitted in rapid review methods guidance. Article screening, data extraction and strength of evidence assessment were completed independently by multiple authors.ResultsThirty-seven studies were included. There was a lack of information about copy letter content. Many patients report being satisfied with copy letters, understand them and find them useful. However, there is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to suggest that copy letters increased patient understanding or improved physical or psychological health outcomes. Many letters were written at a level which would make them inaccessible to patients with low health literacy. The strength of evidence was either “emerging” or “acceptable” practice for most studies (n = 30).ConclusionThere is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to demonstrate the benefits of copy letters as described in health policy.Practice ImplicationsPersonalising letters and using lay rather than medical terms appears to be useful for improving copy letter readability. Further research is required to explore this, especially in people with low health literacy levels

AB - ObjectiveTo systematically identify, synthesise and evaluate the strength of the international evidence on copy letter practice.MethodsA systematic search identified original research studies on copy letters. Searches were limited by date and language as permitted in rapid review methods guidance. Article screening, data extraction and strength of evidence assessment were completed independently by multiple authors.ResultsThirty-seven studies were included. There was a lack of information about copy letter content. Many patients report being satisfied with copy letters, understand them and find them useful. However, there is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to suggest that copy letters increased patient understanding or improved physical or psychological health outcomes. Many letters were written at a level which would make them inaccessible to patients with low health literacy. The strength of evidence was either “emerging” or “acceptable” practice for most studies (n = 30).ConclusionThere is a lack of objective, high quality evidence to demonstrate the benefits of copy letters as described in health policy.Practice ImplicationsPersonalising letters and using lay rather than medical terms appears to be useful for improving copy letter readability. Further research is required to explore this, especially in people with low health literacy levels

KW - Copy letters

KW - Doctor and patient communication

KW - Patient discharge summaries

KW - Patient education

KW - Patient letters

KW - Patient satisfaction

KW - Person centred care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049306457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2018.06.014

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2018.06.014

M3 - Review article

VL - 101

SP - 2065

EP - 2082

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

SN - 0738-3991

IS - 12

ER -