Assessing the quality of AI-generated and physician-written discharge summaries: evaluation of an EHR-integrated tool in a Dutch academic hospital.

BACKGROUND

Large language models (LLMs) offer potential to reduce administrative burden in clinical care by generating discharge summaries. Most prior evaluations have been limited to drafts, small cohorts, or non-integrated settings. Robust validation of fully automated, EHR-integrated systems in real-world practice is lacking.

METHODS

This study was conducted in April 2025 at a Dutch academic hospital. A total of 292 paired discharge summaries from multiple departments were evaluated, each consisting of a physician-written and an LLM-generated version. Summaries were independently assessed by eight blinded clinicians using a 5-point Likert scale across completeness, correctness, and conciseness. Trustworthiness was also scored. Domain and total scores were compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and interrater reliability was quantified using Gwet's AC2.

FINDINGS: LLM-generated summaries had lower completeness (4.50 (4.00-5.00) vs 5.00 (4.50-5.00); p < 0.001), similar correctness (5.00 (4.50-5.00) vs 5.00 (4.63-5.00); p = 0.14), and greater conciseness (5.00 (4.50-5.00) vs 4.50 (4.00-5.00); p < 0.001) compared with physician-written summaries. Total scores did not differ (14.00 (13.00-15.00) vs 14.00 (13.00-15.00); p = 0.34). Physician-written summaries were trusted by both reviewers in 279 (95.5%) cases, whereas LLM-generated summaries were trusted in 249 (85.3%) cases, partially trusted in 34 (11.6%), and rejected in 9 (3.1%). Interrater agreement for total scores was high (AC2 0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.90 for LLM; 0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.89 for physician).

INTERPRETATION: Discharge summaries generated by an EHR-integrated LLM achieved quality ratings comparable to physician-written documents across multiple specialties, with no difference in total scores. Unlike earlier pilot work, this study demonstrates real-world feasibility of automated LLM use in clinical workflows at scale. With appropriate oversight and specialty-specific refinement, such systems could substantially reduce documentation burden while maintaining discharge summary quality.

FUNDING: This research did not receive a specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.