Máire O'Reilly1, Mary R Cahill, Ivan J Perry
1Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University College, Cork, Ireland.
A study tested whether personal letters from consultants improved patient recall and satisfaction in a haematology outpatient clinic. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a detailed letter from their consultant or a brief thank-you note. Recall was measured at a second outpatient visit using a standardized method. The median recall was 67% in the letter group and 57% in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Patients and referring clinicians expressed strong positive views on the letters. The findings suggest that while the letters do not significantly improve recall, they are feasible, well-received, and acceptable to clinicians.
You might also read
Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.
Area of Science:
Background:
It is widely accepted that effective communication between healthcare providers and patients is essential for quality care. Prior research has shown that written summaries may enhance patient understanding of medical consultations. However, no prior work had resolved whether such summaries significantly improve recall of clinical discussions. Established knowledge includes the role of patient education in treatment adherence. That uncertainty drove the need to test whether personal letters from consultants improve patient recall. No prior work had resolved the feasibility of implementing such a strategy in routine care. This gap motivated a study to assess both recall and patient satisfaction. The study aimed to address a practical challenge in outpatient communication. The findings may suggest a low-cost intervention with high patient acceptance.
Purpose Of The Study:
The study aimed to evaluate the impact of personal letters from consultants on patient recall and satisfaction. A specific problem was the lack of evidence on whether such letters improve patient understanding of consultations. The motivation was to test a low-cost intervention that could enhance patient experience. The study focused on new referrals to a haematology outpatient clinic. The goal was to compare two communication strategies: a detailed letter versus a brief thank-you note. The authors proposed that patient recall might improve with written summaries. The study also aimed to assess the feasibility of implementing the intervention. The findings may suggest that patient satisfaction is a key outcome of such communication.
The study found no significant improvement in recall (67% vs. 57%), but patients and clinicians viewed the letters positively.
One group received a detailed letter from their consultant; the other received a brief thank-you note.
The second visit allowed for a standardized assessment of recall after the initial consultation.
The observer assessed recall and satisfaction using standardized methods to ensure objectivity.
Main Methods:
A randomised controlled trial was conducted with new referrals to a haematology outpatient clinic. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a personal letter from their consultant or a brief thank-you note. The intervention group received a detailed summary of their consultation. The control group received a standardised thank-you message. Patient recall was assessed at a follow-up visit using a single independent observer. Standardised methods were used to measure recall of consultation items. Satisfaction was evaluated using patient and clinician feedback. The study design allowed for comparison of recall and satisfaction between groups.
Main Results:
The median percentage recall of consultation items was 67% in the intervention group and 57% in the control group. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.3). Patients in both groups were assessed at a second outpatient visit. The interquartile range for recall was 50-80% in the intervention group and 43-76% in the control group. Strongly positive views on the personal letter were reported by patients and referring clinicians. The findings suggest that personal letters do not substantially improve recall of clinical discussions. However, the intervention was feasible and well-received by patients. Referring clinicians found the letters acceptable and valuable.
Conclusions:
The authors proposed that personal letters from consultants do not significantly improve patient recall of consultations. However, the intervention was feasible and highly valued by patients. Referring clinicians also found the letters acceptable and appreciated their use. The findings suggest that patient satisfaction may be a key benefit of such letters. No prior work had resolved the acceptability of this communication strategy. The study demonstrated that written summaries are practical to implement. The authors proposed that patient satisfaction is an important outcome in outpatient care. The findings may suggest that written communication enhances the patient experience.
The interquartile range was 50-80% for the intervention group and 43-76% for the control group.
The authors concluded that personal letters are feasible and highly valued by patients and clinicians.