Are We Speaking the Same Language? Acronyms in Gastroenterology

Parakh, Pallav; Hindy, Pierre; Fruchter, Gerald

doi:10.1038/ajg.2010.306

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results show that the majority of trainees understand the meaning of commonly used abbreviations and acronyms. Yet a similar study reported that overall correct responses amounted to only 37%;5 furthermore, in the present study, about one-third of the trainees—especially IMRs and students—were unable to give correct responses.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

“…For example, the acronym ‘CP’ can be used for ‘cleft palate’ or ‘cerebral palsy’, two completely different conditions 4. Likewise, ‘PE’ might mean ‘pericardial effusion’ to a cardiologist but ‘pulmonary embolism’ to a pulmonologist 5. Interpretation of acronyms in a medical note is dependent on the knowledge and expertise of the person reading it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use of medical abbreviations and acronyms: knowledge among medical students and postgraduates

Awan

Abid

Tariq

et al. 2016

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of medical abbreviations and acronyms: knowledge among medical students and postgraduates

Awan

Abid

Tariq

et al. 2016

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…El riesgo para la seguridad del paciente asociado al uso de abreviaturas se produce por el desconocimiento del significado de la abreviatura y la dificultad en su interpretación, sobre todo en abreviaturas polisémicas 29,30 . Las abreviaturas polisémicas puede dificultar la comprensión del significado, dando un aumento de la probabilidad de cometer errores, sobre todo en el caso de traslados de ese mismo paciente a otras unidades o especialidades donde se pueden utilizar otros significados para la misma abreviatura 27,31 .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

The use of unsafe abbreviations in discharge report and medical prescription: Observational and retrospective study

Soto-Arnáez

Viana

Carrasco‐Garrido

et al. 2016

An Sist Sanit Navar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The medical record represents the transcript of the pathologic narrative of a patient. Our aims were: to identify the most common abbreviations present in medical records; to identify discouraged abbreviations; to identify polysemic abbreviations; and to show the distribution of the abbreviations according to the type of ward (medical-surgical). Methods. An observational, descriptive and retrospective study by auditing the digital clinical records of patients discharged from FuenlabradaUniversityHospital in 2013 was conducted. Abbreviations in discharge reports and medical order prescriptions present in 78 medical records, corresponding to 39 men and 39 women of different services, were reviewed. Results. All medical records showed abbreviations. The mean of abbreviations in each medical record was 38.9±17.7. Medical records showed 688 different abbreviations, which were repeated up to a total of 3,038 times. The most frequent abbreviations were HTA (n=98; 3.23%), AP (n=89; 2.93%). Twenty-eight abbreviations considered unsafe appeared and were repeated 646 times. The most frequent included SC (n=63; 9.75%), ui (n=49; 7.59%),> (n=38; 5.88%), mcg (n=36; 5.57%). Twenty-three polysemic abbreviations were also identified, the most frequent being H (n=117; 12.81%), MC (n= 109; 11.94%), MP (n=99; 10.84%). Finally, medical wards had 1,866 abbreviations and surgical 1,172 (P <0.001). Conclusions. All medical records revised included unsafe abbreviations. The use of unsafe abbreviations was common among medical services.

show abstract

“…However, an abbreviation can have multiple different meanings, and certain words or phrases can be shortened in several different ways 12 . Meanings are often contextual and specialty specific, with the potential to be uninterpretable or misinterpreted by other healthcare providers, 13–17 resulting in failure of safe clinical handover. International literature has previously indicated that there is incomplete understanding of abbreviations by doctors, with doctors correctly interpreting only 37–73% of abbreviations across various specialties 14–17 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanings are often contextual and specialty specific, with the potential to be uninterpretable or misinterpreted by other healthcare providers, 13–17 resulting in failure of safe clinical handover. International literature has previously indicated that there is incomplete understanding of abbreviations by doctors, with doctors correctly interpreting only 37–73% of abbreviations across various specialties 14–17 . Subspecialty abbreviations are better understood by doctors working in the same field of work, 9,10,18 evidenced by a study on interpretation of ophthalmology abbreviations by Hamiel et al 19 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Danger in discharge summaries: abbreviations create confusion for both author and recipient

Turner

Coverdale

2022

Internal Medicine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The transition from hospital inpatient care to medical care in the community is a high-risk period for adverse events. Inadequate communication, including low-quality or unavailable discharge summaries, has been shown to impact patient care.Aims: To assess use of abbreviations in clinical handover documents from inpatient hospital teams to general practitioners (GP), and the interpretation of these abbreviations by GP and hospital-based junior doctors.Methods: This is a retrospective audit of 802 discharge summaries completed during a 1-week period in 2017 by a Queensland regional health service. GP and local junior doctors then attempted interpretation of 20 relevant abbreviations.Results: A total of 99% (794) discharge summaries included abbreviations. A total of 1612 different abbreviations was used on 16 327 occasions. The median number of abbreviations per discharge summary was 17 (range 0-86). A total of 254 GP and 62 junior doctors responded to a survey, which found that no abbreviation was interpreted the same by all respondents. GP and junior doctors were unable to offer any interpretation in 17.9% and 15.2% of cases respectively. GP offered a greater range of interpretations than junior doctors, with a median of 9 and 3 different interpretations per abbreviation respectively. A total of 94% (239) of GP felt that the use of abbreviations in discharge summaries had the potential to impact patient care. A total of 152 (60%) GP felt that time spent clarifying abbreviations in discharge summaries could be excessive.Conclusions: Abbreviations are often used in discharge summaries, yet poorly understood. This has the potential to impact patient care in the transition period after hospitalisation.

show abstract

Are We Speaking the Same Language? Acronyms in Gastroenterology

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Use of medical abbreviations and acronyms: knowledge among medical students and postgraduates

Use of medical abbreviations and acronyms: knowledge among medical students and postgraduates

The use of unsafe abbreviations in discharge report and medical prescription: Observational and retrospective study

Danger in discharge summaries: abbreviations create confusion for both author and recipient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About