Intraoperative Handoffs

Effect of standardized EHR-integrated handoff report on intraoperative communication outcomes

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the effectiveness and implementability of a standardized EHR-integrated handoff report to support intraoperative handoffs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pre-post intervention study was used to compare the quality of intraoperative handoffs supported by unstructured notes (pre) to structured, standardized EHR-integrated handoff reports (post). Participants included anesthesia clinicians involved in intraoperative handoffs. A mixed-method approach was followed, supported by general observations, shadowing, surveys, and interviews.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-one intraoperative permanent handoffs (78 pre, 73 post) were included. One hundred percent of participants in the post-intervention cohort utilized the report. Compared to unstructured, structured handoffs using the EHR-integrated handoff report led to: (1) significant increase in the transfer of information about airway management (55%-78%, P < .001), intraoperative course (63%-86%, P < .001), and potential concerns (64%-88%, P < .001); (2) significant improvement in clinician satisfaction scores, with regards to information clarity and succinctness (4.5-4.7, P = .002), information transfer (3.8-4.2, P = .011), and opportunities for fewer errors reported by senders (3.3-2.5, P < .001) and receivers (3.2-2.4, P < .001); and (3) significant decrease in handoff duration (326.2-262.3 s, P = .016). Clinicians found the report implementation highly acceptable, appropriate, and feasible but noted a few areas for improvement to enhance its usability and integration within the intraoperative workflow.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

A standardized EHR-integrated handoff report ensures the effectiveness and efficiency of intraoperative handoffs with its structured, consistent format that-promotes up-to-date and pertinent intraoperative information transfer; reduces opportunities for errors; and streamlines verbal communication. Handoff standardization can promote safe and high-quality intraoperative care.

Beyond the Surgical Safety Checklist: Using Intraoperative Handoff to Facilitate Team Situation Awareness in the OR

BACKGROUND

The surgical safety checklist (SSC) has been credited with improving team situation awareness (SA) in the operating room. Although the SSC may support team SA at the outset of the operative case, intraoperative handoff provides an opportunity for either SA breakdown or, more preferably, SA reinforcement. High-functioning surgical teams demonstrate a high level of continued SA, whereas teams deficient in SA are more likely to be affected by surgical errors and adverse events. To date, no interprofessional intraoperative tools exist to support team SA beyond the SSC.

METHODS

This study was divided into 2 phases. The first used qualitative methods to (1) characterize intraoperative handoff processes across surgery, nursing, anesthesia, and perfusion, and (2) identify cultural factors that shaped handoff practices. Data for phase one were collected over 38 observation days and 41 brief interviews. Phase 2, informed by phase 1, used a modified Delphi process to create a tool for use during intraoperative handoff. Data were analyzed iteratively.

RESULTS

Handoff practices were not standardized and rarely involved the entire team. In addition we uncovered cultural factors-specifically assumptions held by participants-that hindered team communication during handoff. Assumptions included: (1) team members are interchangeable, (2) trained individuals are able to determine when it is appropriate to handoff without consulting the OR team. Despite claims of improved teamwork resulting from the SSC, many participants held a fragmented view of the OR team, resulting in communication challenges during handoff. Findings from both phases of our study informed the development of multidisciplinary intraoperative handoff tools to facilitate shared team situation awareness and a shared mental model.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative handoff occurs frequently, and offers the opportunity for either renewed or fractured team SA beyond the SSC.

The impact of case order and intraoperative staff changes on spine surgical efficiency

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Despite concerted efforts toward quality improvement in high-volume spine surgery, there remains concern that increases in case load may compromise the efficient and safe delivery of surgical care. There is a paucity of evidence to describe the effects of spine case order and operating room (OR) team structure on measures of intraoperative timing and OR efficiency.

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine if intraoperative staff changes and surgical case order independently predict extensions in intraoperative timing after spinal surgery for spondylotic diseases.

STUDY DESIGN/ SETTING

Retrospective cohort analysis PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients over age 18 who underwent primary or revision decompression and/or fusion for degenerative spinal diseases between 2017 to 2019 at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Exclusion criteria included absence of descriptive data and intraoperative timing parameters as well as surgery for traumatic injury, infection, and malignancy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Intraoperative timing metrics including total theater time, wheels in to induction, induction start to cut, cut to close, and close to wheels out. Postoperative outcomes included length of hospital stay and 90-day hospital readmissions.

METHODS

Surgical case order and intraoperative changes in staff (circulator and surgical scrub nurse or technician) were determined. Patient demographics, surgical factors, intraoperative timing and postoperative outcomes were recorded. Extensions in each operative stage were determined as a ratio of the actual duration of the parameter divided by the predicted duration of the parameter. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to compare outcomes within case order and staff change groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1,108 patients met the inclusion criteria. First, second, and third start cases differed significantly in intraoperative extensions of total theater time, wheels in to induction, induction start to cut, cut to close, and close to wheels out. On regression, decreasing case order predicted extension in wheels in to induction time. Surgeries with intraoperative staff changes were associated with increases in total theater time, induction start to cut time, cut to close time, close to wheels out time, and length of hospital stay. Switch in primary circulator predicted extended theater time and cut to close time. Relief of primary circulator or scrub predicted extended total theater time, induction start to cut time, cut to close time, and close to wheels out time.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative staff change in spine surgery independently predicted extended operative duration. However, higher case order was not significantly associated with procedural time.

Intraoperative Electronic Alerts Improve Compliance With National Quality Program Measure for Perioperative Temperature Management

BACKGROUND

Reimbursement for anesthesia services has been shifting from a fee-for-service model to a value-based model that ties payment to quality metrics. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's (CMS) value-based payment program includes a quality measure for perioperative temperature management (Measure #424, Perioperative Temperature Management). Compliance may impose new challenges in clinical practice, data collection, and reporting. We investigated the impact of an electronic decision-support tool on adherence to this emerging standard.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, perioperative temperature data were collected from cases eligible for reporting this measure to CMS from a single academic medical center before and after the implementation of an electronic decision-support tool that prompted temperature measurement and maintenance of normothermia. Proportions of measure compliance were assessed using segmented regression analysis. Proportions of intraoperative temperature measurement were also assessed, and multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association between patient and surgical factors and measure compliance.

RESULTS

A total of 24,755 cases eligible for reporting in 2017 were assessed, and 25,274 cases from 2016 were included as an extended baseline. Segmented time-series regression did not show a significant baseline trend in measure compliance. Introduction of the alerts was associated with an increase in overall compliance from 84.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.6%-85.2%) to 92.4% (91.4%-93.4%), and an increase in intraoperative compliance from 26.8% (25.8%-27.8%) to 71.0% (69.6%-72.4%). The association between the alerts and overall compliance was also present on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an intraoperative decision-support tool was associated with statistically significant improvement in the maintenance of normothermia in cases eligible for reporting to CMS. This led to improved compliance with Measure #424 and suggests that electronic alerts can help practices improve their performance and payment bonus eligibility.

Handovers in Perioperative Care

Handovers around the time of surgery are common, yet complex and error prone. Interventions aimed at improving handovers have shown increased provider satisfaction and teamwork, improved efficiency, and improved communication and have been shown to reduce errors and improve clinical outcomes in some studies. Common recommendations in the literature include a standardized institutional process that allows flexibility among different units and settings, the completion of urgent tasks before information transfer, the presence of all members of the team for the duration of the handover, a structured conversation that uses a cognitive aid, and education in team skills and communication.

Checklists and Other Cognitive Aids For Emergency And Routine Anesthesia Care-A Survey on the Perception of Anesthesia Providers From a Large Academic US Institution

Background:

The use of printed or electronic checklists and other cognitive aids has gained increasing interest from anesthesia providers and professional societies. While these aids are not currently considered standard of care, the perceptions of the clinician might have an impact on their adoption.

Objectives:

We conducted a comprehensive survey to study the current opinions of anesthesia provider on the use of checklists and other cognitive aids.

Patients and Methods:

A questionnaire was developed by a departmental checklist focus group, which aimed to identify the perception of health care checklists in general as well as specific checklists for routine and crisis situations in anesthesia. Furthermore participants were asked regarding their perception of performing routine anesthesia and managing crisis situations without any cognitive aids. Using a web-based system, the survey was administered to all anesthesia providers at a single large United States academic medical center (University of California San Francisco). Demographic information included professional status (faculty, anesthesia resident, or nurse anesthetists [certified registered nurse anesthetists; CRNA]) and years of clinical experience.

Results:

69% of 312 providers responded. 98% of the survey takers consider the procedural time-out (the widely used pre-incision operating room checklist) as important or very important. We found that many anesthesia providers acknowledged limitations in their ability to perform clinical tasks without any lapses, and a majority would use checklists and other cognitive aids if available. Their acceptances are especially high for crisis situations (87 - 97%, depending on years of experience) and routine care that providers do not perform often (76 - 91%). Printed or electronic aids for patient-care transition and shift hand-offs were also valued (61% and 58%). To prepare for and perform routine anesthesia care, 40% of providers claimed interest in using checklists, however, the interest differed significantly with clinical experience: While both the least and most experienced providers valued aids for routine anesthesia (54% and 50%), only 29% of providers with 2 - 10 years of anesthesia experience claimed interest in using them. Distraction from patient care and decreased efficiency were concerns expressed for the use of routine checklist (27% and 31%, respectively). The main factors found to support the successful implementation of checklists into clinical care are ease of use and thoughtful integration into the anesthesia workflow.

Conclusions:

Providers at our large academic institution generally embrace the concept of checklists and other cognitive aids. This was true for all providers for checklists for procedural time outs, anesthesia crisis situations and those for routine procedures that providers rarely perform. Only very experienced and very junior providers appreciated the use of checklists for routine care. There remains a discrepancy between these claims and provider’s perception on their clinical competency based on memory alone.

Handoffs and transitions in critical care (HATRICC): protocol for a mixed methods study of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs

Background

Operating room to intensive care unit handoffs are high-risk events for critically ill patients. Studies in selected patient populations show that standardizing operating room to intensive care unit handoffs improves information exchange and decreases errors. To adapt these findings to mixed surgical populations, we propose to study the implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process in two intensive care units currently without an existing standard process.

Methods/Design

The Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) study is a hybrid effectiveness- implementation trial of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs. We will use mixed methods to conduct a needs assessment of the current handoff process, adapt published handoff processes, and implement a new standardized handoff process in two academic intensive care units. Needs assessment: We will use non-participant observation to observe the current handoff process. Focus groups, interviews, and surveys of clinicians will elicit participants’ impressions about the current process. Adaptation and implementation: We will adapt published standardized handoff processes using the needs assessment findings. We will use small group simulation to test the new process’ feasibility. After simulation, we will incorporate the new handoff process into the clinical work of all providers in the study units. Evaluation: Using the same methods employed in the needs assessment phase, we will evaluate use of the new handoff process. Data analysis: The primary effectiveness outcome is the number of information omissions per handoff episode as compared to the pre-intervention period. Additional intervention outcomes include patient intensive care unit length of stay and intensive care unit mortality. The primary implementation outcome is acceptability of the new process. Additional implementation outcomes include feasibility, fidelity and sustainability.

Discussion

The HATRICC study will examine the effectiveness and implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process. Findings from this study have the potential to improve healthcare communication and outcomes for critically ill patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02267174. Date of registration October 16, 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2482-14-96) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Continuity of Care in the Training Environment: Anesthesiology Residency in the Ambulatory Surgery Setting

BACKGROUND

Anesthesiology residents acquire clinical skills and acumen primarily from experience providing anesthesia for procedural cases, with prior preparation maximizing learning. Ambulatory surgery and associated management styles create fluid anesthesiology staffing-reducing predictability for learners and disrupting continuity of care.

OBJECTIVE

This prospective, observational study aimed to quantify anesthesia personnel changes in the operating rooms of a single teaching hospital.

METHODS

For a 5-week period, Monday through Friday, we recorded the surgical schedule on the prior evening. After the day of surgery, tracking software provided a list of cases performed. We completed electronic health record review for each case, recorded the actual anesthesiology personnel involved, and compared that to the personnel originally scheduled. We also recorded the occurrence of any permanent transitions of care within a case, the type of operation, and the anesthesia start and end times.

RESULTS

Anesthesia providers included 47 residents and 32 attending physicians. The study period included 1285 scheduled cases, 55% (n  =  711) of which were started and finished by the originally scheduled resident and attending physician. Including canceled cases (126 of 1285, 10%) and added cases (207 of 1366, 15%), residents started anesthetics on patients and with attending physicians assigned to them from the day before 54% of the time. Transitions of care occurred in 19% (260 of 1366) of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthesiology residents prepare for many procedures that do not eventuate and frequently start other cases without prior opportunity for preparation and study. Transitions of care further reduce continuity of care and fragment supervision.

Addressing the Mandate for Hand-off Education

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires that residency programs teach residents about handoffs and ensure their competence in this communication skill. Development of hand-off curricula for anesthesia residency programs is hindered by the paucity of evidence regarding how to conduct, teach, and evaluate handoffs in the various settings where anesthesia practitioners work. This narrative review draws from literature in anesthesia and other disciplines to provide recommendations for anesthesia resident hand-off curriculum development and evaluation.