J Patient Saf. 2026 Jul 14. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000001559. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of a templated interhospital transfer (IHT) note on transfer appropriateness and clinical outcomes.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study of 100 IHTs to the Department of Medicine services between May and June 2023. The exposure was the type of documentation at the time of transfer, categorized as templated note, nontemplated note, or no note. The primary outcome was appropriateness of transfer, determined by 2 independent adjudicators using a standardized framework developed as part of the POINT Study. Documentation type by clinical specialty and reason for transfer were assessed, with statistical analyses of clinical outcomes limited to those with an incidence >5% (ie, escalation/downgrade in level of care within 24 h of transfer and 30 d mortality).
RESULTS: Among 100 transfers, 81 (81%) were deemed appropriate and 19 (19%) were deemed inappropriate. Documentation was present in 59%, including templated (35%) and nontemplated notes (24%). IHTs without documentation had the highest appropriateness rate (87.8%, 36/41), compared with templated notes (29/35, 82.9%; P=0.15) and nontemplated notes (66.7%, 16/24; P=0.042). Downgrades were more common in inappropriate transfers with nontemplated notes (50.0%, 4/8) than in appropriate transfers with templated notes (10.3%, 3/29; P=0.012).
CONCLUSIONS: Structured IHT documentation was inconsistently used and did not predict the appropriateness of transfer. Transfers without documentation were most often appropriate, suggesting straightforward cases may not require formal notes. In contrast, nontemplated notes in inappropriate transfers showed high downgrade rates, implying that unstructured documentation may inflate perceived acuity. Further evaluation of documentation strategies is needed to support appropriate transfer decision-making.
PMID:42447403 | DOI:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001559
