Reputation and the Legibility of Doctors' Handwriting in Situ
Open Access
- 1 June 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Scottish Medical Journal
- Vol. 46 (3) , 79-80
- https://doi.org/10.1177/003693300104600305
Abstract
The consequences of failed communication can be as disastrous and doctors have a reputation for illegibility. Previous research supports this opinion but little work has been done to assess doctors' legibility in situ. Our study evaluates if doctors deserve their reputation and investigates how legibility is affected by the time taken to write. Sets of in-patient hospital notes were selected at random. The first written entry by a doctor and a nurse in the current admission were analysed. In addition to this, 10 doctors and 10 nurses, unaware of the true nature of the study, wrote out lists of words and the time taken to do the task was recorded. The doctors' handwriting was significantly less legible (p=0.010) and they wrote significantly quicker (p=0.005). However a small minority of the doctors was responsible for the majority of illegible words written by that group.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Legibility of doctors' handwriting: quantitative comparative studyBMJ, 1998
- Legibility and completeness of physicians' handwritten medication ordersHeart & Lung, 1997
- The truth about doctors' handwriting: a prospective studyBMJ, 1996
- Illegible Handwritten Medical RecordsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- THE FACTS ON THE LEGIBILITY OF DOCTORS’ HANDWRITINGThe Medical Journal of Australia, 1976