A scoping review of 73 studies found that After-Visit and Discharge Summaries improve communication and care transitions, though usability and technological constraints limit their effectiveness.
Systematic Review (n=73)
After-Visit and Discharge Summaries enhance patient communication and care transitions, but require stakeholder-driven design and standardization to overcome usability barriers.
BACKGROUND: After-Visit Summary (AVS) and Discharge Summary (DS) are essential tools for patient-centered care, aiming to improve communication, enhance engagement, and provide clear, actionable health information. While AVS and DS have been studied in various contexts, no scoping review has systematically explored their usage, perceptions, and outcomes from the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. Despite their potential, challenges such as usability issues, design variability, and technological constraints often limit their effectiveness. By mapping existing evidence, this review aims to explore usage, attitudes, and outcomes of AVS and DS from the stakeholders’ perspectives, identifying critical barriers and facilitators, and highlighting areas for improvement to guide future implementation and optimization of these tools. METHODS: The scoping review was conducted following JBI and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library, with additional screening of reference lists. Studies involving patients, caregivers, or healthcare providers and examining AVS and DS implementation in any healthcare setting were included. RESULTS: Seventy-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were conducted in the USA (47.9%), utilized quantitative methods (54.8%) and focused on DS implementation (71.2%). Key findings showed that AVS and DS improve communication, patient engagement, and care transitions. Patients appreciated clear and concise summaries, while healthcare providers identified challenges with workflow integration and time constraints. Barriers included technical language, inconsistent formatting, and limited EHR integration. Facilitators such as simplified language, tailored content, and stakeholder involvement improved usability and effectiveness. Outcomes reported included better patient understanding of their condition, improved adherence to medical advice and treatment plans, and enhanced care continuity during transitions. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of stakeholder perspective on AVS and DS. While these tools are essential for enhancing communication and empowering patients, their efficacy hinges on overcoming challenges related to usability and standardization. By identifying key barriers and opportunities, our findings offer a foundation for refining AVS and DS through stakeholder-driven design, policy development, and technological advancements. Participatory design, research advancements, and technology integration are key to enhancing their usability and impact across healthcare settings.
Monaci et al. (Mon,) reported a systematic review. After-Visit Summary and Discharge Summary was evaluated on Usage, perceptions, and outcomes of AVS and DS from the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. A scoping review of 73 studies found that After-Visit and Discharge Summaries improve communication and care transitions, though usability and technological constraints limit their effectiveness.