Discharge delays in medically fit patients with altered social support needs

Abstract ID
4067
Authors' names
M Pagan1; J Williams1; L Dayalan1; P Peaster1; L Pollock1; T Solanki1
Author's provenances
1Musgrove Park Hospital, Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Abstract category
Abstract sub-category
Conditions

Abstract

Prolonged hospital stays for medically fit patients pending discharge destinations are a persistent problem for the national health service, depleting funds and bed availability. Crucially, patients risk hospital-acquired infection, institutionalisation and deconditioning. Discharge destinations for patients with altered need for government-funded social support are decided following submission of a universal referral form (URF), completed by the multidisciplinary team (MDT). Policy states URFs should be submitted 48 hours after a patient is deemed medically fit for discharge (MFFD). We hypothesised that URF submission contributed to discharge delays.

Our quality improvement project reviewed the time taken to complete URFs on an older adult ward at Musgrove Park Hospital during March 2025.  Inclusion criteria required a change to the patient’s social support upon discharge, without private funding or palliative plans.

We found 40.6% of URFs were submitted within 72 hours of MFFD status. Furthermore, 34.4% took over a week, and 9.4% took over three weeks to submit. Findings were presented at a governance meeting, which recommended reducing the number of staff needed to complete URFs, covering discharge team absences and drafting URFs 48 hours before MFFD status (guided by morning MDT meetings). Following the implementation of these changes, data collection was repeated in July 2025. 58.3% of URFs were submitted within 72 hours of MFFD status, 16.7% took over a week, and 0% had delays over three weeks.

These changes were supported by previous research, which suggested unmanageable workloads, unclear ownership and ambiguous treatment plans as potential delays in URF submission. Our two-cycle project identified a delay in URF submissions, and using a collaborative approach, we reduced the length of hospital stays. However, struggles to meet target timescales remain, and further investigation is needed. This includes a repeat cycle in three months on a larger cohort, to confirm the implemented changes are sustainable.

Comments

This is great! MDT communication is so important to ensure that the process runs smoothly. We have started this process in place however still have some ways to go but your work shows it is possible!

Submitted by lenise.clothie… on

Permalink

A huge issue, and continues to rise, is delays in discharges leading to poor flow within the hospital. Writing any changes to a patient's care in the discharge letter throughout admission also helps, so there isn't a big scramble on the day of discharge to go through hundreds of notes. Good MDT communication clearly helps! 

Submitted by joseph.clarkso… on

Permalink

It's great to see that improved MDT communication can measurably improve discharge delays, leading to better patient flow overall. 

Submitted by mzyba6@notting… on

Permalink

Very important topic & good improvement! Great to recognise the positive impact of the permanent PA on the ward. Did you find that the faster completion of the URF produced faster discharge for MFFD patients? 

Submitted by j.honey840@gmail.com on

Permalink

Patients awaiting a 'social sort' is a huge rising issue in all hospitals. A very good audit highlighting the importance of effective communication within the MDT.

 

Submitted by elizabeth.secc… on

Permalink