Standardized text messages improve 30-day patient follow-up for ACS pediatric NSQIP cases

  • Stephanie L. Taylor
  • Jenna M. Meyer
  • Armando Salim Munoz-Abraham
  • Kaveer ChatoorgoonEmail author
Original Article



Thirty-day follow-up is a critical and challenging component of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). We hypothesized the simplicity and immediacy of text messaging would increase response rates while reducing workload.


For 6 months, text messages were the primary form of contact for first and second follow-up attempts. If no response, a phone call was made. Results of this protocol were compared to the previous 6 months when phone calls were the primary method.


The text message (TM) group had 298 cases and phone call (PC) group had 354. The first contact was successful in 63.8% of the TM group compared to 47.5% of the PC group. The second contact was successful in 15.4% (TM) and 16.9% (PC). In the third attempt, 3.0% answered the call in the TM group versus 9.3% in the PC group. Some families remained unreachable: 17.8% in TM group and 26.3% in PC group (p = 0.01). When totaled, time spent to obtain caregivers’ responses was over five times higher in the PC group (910 min) than the TM group (173 min) (p = 0.005).


Patient follow-up using text messaging has improved our follow-up rate while decreasing workload.


NSQIP Follow-up Text messaging Quality improvement Outcomes 



The authors of this manuscript acknowledge the contributions of Paula Buchanan MPH, Ph.D., from the Center of Health Outcomes Research at Saint Louis University, and Hector Osei, MD from the department of Pediatric Surgery at Cardinal Glennon/Saint Louis University.


  1. 1.
    Pew Research Center (2015) The smartphone difference. Accessed 15 June 2018
  2. 2.
    Lin H, Chen W, Luo L, Congdon N et al (2012) Effectiveness of a short message reminder in increasing compliance with pediatric cataract treatment: a randomized trial. Ophthalmology 119:2463–2470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahlers-Schmidt C, Chesser A, Paschal A, Hart T et al (2012) Parent opinions about use of text messaging for immunization reminders. J Med Internet Res 14(3):e83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Branson C, Clemmey P, Mukherjee P (2013) Text message reminders to improve outpatient therapy attendance among adolescents: a pilot study. Psychol Serv 10(3):298–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Britto M, Munafo J, Schoettker P, Vockell A et al (2012) Pilot and feasibility test of adolescent-controlled text messaging reminders. Clin Pediatr 51(2):114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maher J, Pranian K, Drach L et al (2010) Using text messaging to contact difficult-to-reach study participants. Am J Public Health 100(6):969–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bigna J, Noubiap J, Kouanfack C et al (2014) Effect of mobile phone reminders on follow-up medical care of children exposed to or infected with HIV in cameroon (MORE CARE): a multicentre, single-blind, factorial, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis 14(7):600–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Da Costa T, Barbosa B, e Costa D et al (2012) Results of a randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of a mobile SMS-based intervention on treatment adherence in HIV/AIDS-infected Brazilian women and impressions and satisfaction with respect to incoming messages. Int J Med Inform 81(4):257–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McKenzie R, Berquist W, Foley M et al (2015) Text messaging improves participation in laboratory testing in adolescent liver transplant patients. J Particip Med 7:e7Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Price M, Ruggiero K, Ferguson P et al (2014) A feasibility pilot study on the use of text messages to track PTSD symptoms after a traumatic injury. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 36(3):249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Junod P, Dao M, Righini N et al (2013) Text-messaging versus telephone reminders to reduce missed appointments in an academic primary care clinic: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res 13(1):125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh G, Manjunatha N, Rao S et al (2017) Use of mobile phone technology to improve follow-up at a community mental health clinic: a randomized control trial. Indian J Psychol Med 39(3):276–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kannisto KA, Koivunen MH, Välimäki M (2014) Use of mobile phone text message reminders in health care services: a narrative literature review. J Med Internet Res 16(10):e222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    US Department of Health & Human Services (2013) Summary of the HIPAA privacy rule. Accessed 17 Dec 2018
  15. 15.
    HIPAA Journal (2018) What is considered protected health information under HIPAA? Accessed 17 Dec 2018
  16. 16.
    Christie A, Dagfinrud H, Dale O et al (2014) Collection of patient-reported outcomes: text messages on mobile phones provide valid scores and high response rates. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kew S (2010) Text messaging: an innovative method of data collection in medical research. BMC Res Notes 3:342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Day M, Anthony C, Bedard N et al (2018) Increasing perioperative communication with automated mobile phone messaging in total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 33(1):19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Duane S, Tandan M, Murphy A, Vellinga A (2017) Using mobile phones to collect patient data: lessons learned from the SIMPle study. JMIR Res Protoc 6(4):e61CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephanie L. Taylor
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jenna M. Meyer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Armando Salim Munoz-Abraham
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kaveer Chatoorgoon
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Pediatric Surgery, SSM Health Cardinal Glennon Children’s HospitalSaint Louis UniversitySt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Division of Pediatric SurgerySaint Louis University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations