A quantitative assessment of patient and nurse outcomes of bedside nursing report implementation

Analysis of Nurses' Perceptions of Handover Practices: A Comparative Study in Different Medical Settings

This article reports a comparative prospective study aimed to explore and compare nurses' perceptions of bedside clinical handover in 3 different settings (emergency unit, ICU, and medical ward). Results revealed that the participant nurses' perceptions varied significantly for different aspects of the handover process. Our data demonstrate department-specific variations in perceptions related to the adequacy, organization, relevance, availability of charts, use of charts for review, ease of following the information, and timeliness of the information.

Involving the Patient and Family in the Transfer of Information at Shift Change in a Pediatric Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

The transfer of information at the change of shift is a critical point for patient experience during the care process. The aim of this study was to evaluate caregivers' perceptions before and after the implementation of a multidisciplinary bedside handoff in a pediatric emergency department (PED).

METHODS

This was a quality improvement pre-post intervention, single-center study. The authors included caregivers of patients allocated in the observation unit of a PED during health care provider shift change. The study was made up of the following phases: (1) preintervention survey distribution, (2) implementation of the bedside handoff, involving all health care professionals (including nurses, nursing assistants, and pediatricians) and caregivers, and (3) postintervention survey distribution. The survey explored the three dimensions of patient experience defined as main study outcomes: information received and communication with professionals, participation, and continuity of care.

RESULTS

A total of 102 surveys were collected (51 each in the preintervention and postintervention phases). In the preintervention phase, 94.1% of caregivers would have wished to be actively involved in the change of shift. In the postintervention phase, more caregivers felt that professionals had proper introductions (49.0% vs. 84.3%; p < 0.01), had kept them informed of the plan to be followed (58.8% vs. 84.3%; p = 0.02), and encouraged questions (45.1% vs. 82.4%; p < 0.01). Caregivers of the postintervention phase perceived less disorganization during the change of shift (25.5% vs. 5.9%; p = 0.01) and a greater sense of continuity (64.7% vs. 86.3%; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The bedside handoff is a useful strategy to improve patient and family perceptions of communication with professionals, information received, and continuity of care at health care providers shift change. Future lines of research and improvement include ensuring equity in participation in the bedside handoff for all caregivers, monitoring the handoffs to determine how often patients/caregivers participate and correct mistakes in information transfer. and exploring professionals' perceptions.

Nurses' Risk Perception of Adverse Events and Its Influencing Factors: A Cross-Sectional Study

To investigate clinical nurses' perception of adverse event risk and to analyze its influencing factors. A proportional stratified random sampling method was applied to recruit nurses from a hospital in Shiyan City, Hubei Province, China. The Nursing Adverse Event Risk Perception Scale, Organizational Support Questionnaire, Nurse Manager Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, Nursing Safety Behavior Questionnaire, and Burnout scale was used to investigate 1084 nurses. Univariate analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis were used to analyze the influencing factors. The scores of the Nurses' Risk Perception of Adverse Nursing Event Scale, Organizational Support Questionnaire, Nurse Manager Leadership Behavior Questionnaire, Nursing Safety Behavior Questionnaire, and Burnout Scale were 14.98 ± 5.39, 52.57 ± 10.00, 88.98 ± 21.08, 56.42 ± 5.03, 30.90 ± 21.49, respectively. According to the correlation analysis, nurses' perception of adverse nursing events was positively correlated with the sense of organizational support (r = .457, P < .01), head nurses' leadership behavior (r = .348, P < .01), and nurse safety behavior (r = .457, P < .01), and negatively correlated with the level of burnout (r = -.384, P < .01). According to the Regression analysis, nurses' departments (β = .226, P < .001), daily working hours (β = 1.122, P < .001), adverse events experience (β = -1.505, P < .001), organizational support (β = .105, P < .001), head nurses' leadership behavior (β = .072, P < .001), and burnout (β = -.052, P < .001) held an influence on nurses' risk perception of adverse nursing event. These factors explained 42.5% of the total variation. Nurses' risk perception of adverse nursing events needs to be improved. Nursing managers need to strengthen organizational support for nurses, change the leadership behavior of nurse managers, reduce nurses' burnout, improve nurses' risk perception of adverse nursing events, prevent adverse events, and ensure patient safety.

Evaluating the Methodological Approaches of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Bedside Handover Attitudes and Behaviours Questionnaire into Portuguese

Nurse managers need culturally adapted assessment instruments to support the implementation of change to Nursing Bedside Handover (NBH) in healthcare institutions. This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the Bedside Handover Attitudes and Behaviours (BHAB) questionnaire to the Portuguese context and evaluate the methodological approaches used for this purpose. To guide this study, we followed a guideline for cross-cultural translation and adaptation measurement instruments in healthcare. The results of the content validity testing suggested that the BHAB questionnaire is a valid instrument for use in the Portuguese context. To obtain these results we showed 1) using of a new methodological approach, the dual focus, to resolve the divergences and ambiguities in the translators' committee and the multi-professional committee; 2) the lack of a conceptual definition of the construct of the instrument as a requirement to retain items with I-CVI <0.70 after validity relevance pretesting and 3) the cognitive debriefing and relevance pretesting as methodological approaches which can be used alone or together to reinforce the evaluation of cultural relevance of the items. We concluded there is a need for guidelines to support the decision-making process of healthcare researchers with comprehensive information about the different methodological approaches they can follow.

Influencing Factors of Nurses' Practice during the Bedside Handover: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Protocol

Nursing Bedside Handover (NBH) is acknowledged as a nursing practice implemented at the patient's bedside to improve communication safety during the shift change, but it is vulnerable due to inconsistent application among nurses. This synthesis of qualitative evidence aims to review and synthesize the perceptions and experiences of nurses regarding the factors that, in their perspective, influence NBH practice. We will follow the thematic synthesis methodology of Thomas and Harden and the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) Statement guidelines. A search will be conducted through the databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus, and we will follow the three-step search process to identify primary studies with qualitative or mixed-method research designs and projects of quality improvement. The screening and selection of the studies will be carried out by two independent reviewers. We will use the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) to report the screening, search, and selection of studies. To assess its methodological quality, two reviewers will independently use the CASM Tool. The extracted data will be reviewed, categorized, and summarized in tabular and narrative formats. The findings obtained will allow us to inform future research and change management led by nurse managers.

Relationship between Nurses’ Attitudes and Satisfaction with Bedside Shift Reports and Patient Safety Culture

Background: A thoroughly standardized nurse bedside shift report, including effective communication, may improve nurses’ satisfaction and patients’ safety. However, a few studies were found that measure the relationships between nurses’ attitudes and satisfaction with bedside shift reports and patient safety outcomes.Purpose: This study aimed to measure nurses’ attitudes and satisfaction with bedside shift reports and their relationships with patient safety culture.Methods: A cross-sectional and descriptive study was conducted between May to August 2021 among 90 bedside nurses conveniently recruited from a public hospital in Lebanon. The Bedside Handover Report Staff Nurses’ Satisfaction Survey and the Survey on Patient Safety (SOPS) were used to collect data. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation and inferential statistics, i.e., Pearson correlation coefficient.Results: The results showed that satisfaction scores were high in all the questions in the bedside shift reporting. The participants showed relatively positive attitudes towards bedside shift reports where all the statements recorded above-average mean values. The highest-ranking statement “bedside shift report is completed in a reasonable time” was recorded with a mean value of 3.35 (SD=0.87), while the lowest-ranking statement was “bedside shift report is relatively stress-free” with a mean value of 2.03 (SD=0.86). There were significant relationships between nurses’ satisfaction with shift reports and some patient safety culture composites, such as between nurses’ satisfaction with bedside shift reports and communication about errors and reporting of patient safety events (p<0.05) and between nurses’ attitudes toward bedside shift reports and communication about errors (p<0.001)Conclusion: Implementation of the bedside shift report improves nurses’ levels of satisfaction, enhances positive attitudes toward work, and enhances patients' safety. Nursing leaders should encourage nurses to implement bedside handover reports in their hospitals.

Development and psychometric testing of the patient participation in bedside handover survey

Introduction

When handover is conducted at the patient's bedside, active patient participation can be encouraged, which may improve the safety and quality of care. There is a need for valid and reliable tools to measure patient perceptions of participation in bedside handover, to ensure the rising number of implementation and improvement efforts are consistently and effectively evaluated. The aim of this study is to systematically develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of a self‐report survey to measure patients' perceptions of participation in bedside handover.

Methods

In Phase 1, our team developed a conceptual framework and item pool (n = 130). In Phase 2, content validity was assessed with four health consumers, four nurses and four researchers. Next, 10 current hospital inpatients tested the survey for end‐user satisfaction. In Phase 3, 326 inpatients completed the survey, allowing exploratory factor analysis, reliability analyses and convergent/divergent validity analyses to occur.

Results

Phase 1 and 2 resulted in a 42‐item survey. In Phase 3, 321 surveys were available for analysis. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a three‐factor solution, with 24 items, which matched our conceptual framework. The three factors were: ‘Conditions for patient participation in bedside handover’, ‘Level of patient participation in bedside handover’ and ‘Evaluation of patient participation in bedside handover’. There was strong evidence for factor reliability and validity. Additionally, the correlation between factors was strong.

Conclusion

This study furthers our conceptual understanding by showing that nurse facilitating behaviours are a strong precursor for patient participation and perceived handover outcomes, justifying the need for nursing training. A robust survey has been developed to measure patient perceptions of participation in bedside handover, which can effectively evaluate this approach to care. Engaging consumers and nurses as research team members was invaluable in ensuring that the survey is acceptable for end‐users.

Patient or Public Contribution

A health consumer and nurse partnered as members of the research team from study inception to dissemination.

Algorithmic Curation and Users’ Civic Attitudes: A Study on Facebook News Feed Results

Facebook users are exposed to diverse news and political content; this means that Facebook is a significant tool for the enhancement of civic participation and engagement in politics. However, it has been argued that Facebook, through its algorithmic curation reinforces the pre-existing attitudes of individuals, rather than challenging or potentially altering them. The objective of this study is to elucidate the emotional and behavioural impact of the personalization of Facebook users’ News Feeds results, and thereby to uncover a possible link between their online and offline civic attitudes. Firstly, we investigate the extent to which users’ Facebook News Feeds results are personalized and customized to fit users’ pre-existing civic attitudes and political interests. Secondly, we explore whether users embody new roles as a result of their emotional and behavioural interaction with political content on Facebook. Our methodology is based on a quantitative survey involving 108 participants. Our findings indicate that, while Facebook can potentially expose users to varying political views and beliefs, it tends to reinforce existing civic attitudes and validate what users already hold to be true. Furthermore, we find that users themselves often assume a proactive stance towards Facebook News Feed results, acquiring roles in which they filter and even censor the content to which they are exposed and thus trying to obfuscate algorithmic curation.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Bedside Nursing Handover: A Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis

BACKGROUND

Bedside nursing handover (BNH) has been recognized as a contributor to patient-centered care. However, concerns about its effectiveness suggest that contextual factors should be considered before and after BNH implementation.

PURPOSE

This review aimed to identify, evaluate, and synthetize the qualitative literature on the barriers to and facilitators of BNH as experienced by nurses and patients.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute meta-aggregation method was applied. A systematic search was performed to identify qualitative studies published from inception to June 30, 2020. Two independent researchers assessed methodological quality and extracted data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included, comprising 161 findings, and 5 synthesized findings emerged with a moderate level of confidence.

CONCLUSIONS

BNH ensures patient safety and increases satisfaction and recognition among patients and nurses. This evidence on the barriers to and facilitators of BNH could help health care providers who have implemented or plan to implement this practice.

Do Falls and Other Safety Issues Occur More Often During Handovers When Nurses Are Away From Patients? Findings From a Retrospective Study Design

BACKGROUND

No studies have assessed the differences in the incidences of falls and other patient safety events (PSEs) during handovers performed away from patients compared with when nurses are on the unit.

PURPOSE

The primary aim was to explore the incidence of falls and their severity during handovers compared with during nonhandover times; the secondary aim was to explore the occurrence of other PSEs during handover versus nonhandover times.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all PSEs that occurred from 2013 to 2017 in a large Italian academic trust.

RESULTS

There were 1966 falls and 1523 other PSEs. The incidence of falls per 100 hours was 4.9 during handovers and 4.4 during nonhandover times. The incidences of other PSEs were 2.9 and 3.5, respectively. No significant differences in fall outcome severity emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences emerged in the occurrence of falls during handovers performed away from patients and when nurses were on the unit. Other PSEs decreased in occurrence during handovers as compared with other times during the shifts.

Implementing and Sustaining Bedside Shift Report for Quality Patient-Centered Care

BACKGROUND

Two evidence-based practice projects and an innovative model provided best evidence and a framework for the implementation and sustainment of a bedside shift report (BSR) quality improvement project.

PROBLEM

Without a standardized BSR process, there was a lack of Veteran involvement in care planning decisions and nurse dissatisfaction related to missed communication of pertinent patient information.

APPROACH

Facilitators and barriers were identified and addressed during planning. Key elements of BSR were incorporated. After approval by shared governance, unit-based champions and leaders supported the change. Implementation began every 2 weeks on a different unit.

OUTCOMES

Implementation was completed in 4 months for 11 units. After 15 months, there was consistent BSR on 82% of the units and improved patient satisfaction with nurses taking time to listen.

CONCLUSIONS

Best evidence, unit-based champions, leadership support, project coordinators, and persistence are critical to implementing and sustaining practice change.

A person centered nursing care intervention on a medical surgical unit

When a patient is admitted to a hospital, admission assessments are completed in the electronic medical record. There is minimal information about who the person is, what they liked to be called, favorite activity, and or past occupation to view. A communication board is visible to all caring for the patient. This pre-post design evaluated whether using "All About Me Board" (AAMB) could change workplace climate perception among 25 registered nurses (RN)s in a 28 bed medical surgical unit. RNs were asked to participate in a Person Centered Climate Questionnaire and were provided education about purpose and use of the AAMB, which were placed in each patient's room. Having the AAMB placed and visible in patient rooms provided healthcare providers personal information to assist in planning care with patients and family. Survey results were favorable in supporting a workplace environment where patients were empowered to participate in planning their care.

A Practical Guide to the Implementation of Bedside Report in a Critical Care Setting

Blended bedside report increases peer-to-peer accountability among nurses, improves communication between nurses as well as patients, and promotes patient safety. Despite the literature that documents bedside report is best, a practical guide to initiating this process in a hospital setting is lacking. A unit-based council composed of staff nurses and 1 member of nursing management on a neurosurgical intensive care unit designed a unit-wide education initiative involving multiple modalities and peer-to-peer training. This combination led to a successful culture change from traditional report to blended bedside reporting process.

Patient safety culture and handoff evaluation of nurses in small and medium-sized hospitals

Objectives

This study was conducted to investigate the current status of handoffs, perception of patient safety culture, and degrees of handoff evaluation in small and medium-sized hospitals and identified factors that make a difference in handoff evaluation.

Methods

This is a descriptive study. 425 nurses who work at small and medium-sized hospitals in South Korea were included in our study. They completed a set of self-reporting questionnaires that evaluated demographic data, handoff-related characteristics, perception of patient safety culture, and handoff evaluation.

Results

Results showed that the overall score of awareness of a patient safety culture was 3.65 ± 0.45, the level was moderate. The score of handoff evaluation was 5.24 ± 0.85. Most nurses experienced errors in handoff and most nurses had no guidelines and checklist in the ward. Handoff evaluation differed significantly according to the level of education, work patterns, duration of hospital employment, handoff method, degree of satisfaction with the current handoff method, errors occurring at the time of handoff, handoff guidelines, and appropriateness of handoff education time (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

For handoff improvement, guidelines and standards should be established. It is necessary to develop a structured handoff education system. And formal handoff education should be implemented to spread knowledge uniformly.

Impact of Person-Centered Interventions on Patient Outcomes in Acute Care Settings: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Preventing adverse events is one of the most important issues in health care.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the impact of person-centered interventions on patient outcomes in an acute care setting.

METHODS

The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Eligible interventions included person-centered interventions that address at least one of these outcomes: pressure ulcer, accidental falls, medication errors, and/or cross infection.

RESULTS

The review showed that there is a paucity of evidence supporting the use of person-centered interventions in reducing patient falls. For the other outcomes, existing research provides an insufficient evidence base on which to draw conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Theory of person-centeredness is still in its ascendency. Poor evidence may also be the result of quantitative research designs that are insufficient in studying the impact of a person-centered approach. We postulate that use of mixed-methods designs is beneficial and would give a clearer picture of the impact of person-centered interventions.

The benefits of consumer involvement in nursing handover on acute inpatient unit: Post-implementation views

The involvement of consumers in handover with nurses has been identified as reducing miscommunication between transitions in care and associated with reduction in adverse events in generalist nursing settings. The notion of having consumers present in nursing handover on acute mental health inpatient unit remains a relatively new concept. Central to recovery-focused mental health care is the consumer's active participation in the delivery of their care. The aim of this study was to explore the views of consumers with a mental illness about their experiences of being involved in nursing handover on acute mental health inpatient unit post-implementation of a new nursing handover involving consumers. Using an exploratory descriptive qualitative design, participants (N = 10) were recruited using purposive convenience sampling. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken, and the data were thematically analysed. Participants' principal diagnoses were schizophrenia (n = 2), schizoaffective disorder (n = 3), bipolar affective disorder (n = 2), borderline personality disorder (n = 1), and depression (n = 2). Three themes were generated from the interviews: (i) Knowing who, (ii) Shared decision-making, with subthemes: my voice was heard and not just a meet and greet, and (iii) Having time and space. The delivery of mental health care needs to put the consumer at the centre of such care regardless of the setting. In line with recovery-focused principles, the consumer's active involvement in the crucial activity of nursing handover on acute mental health inpatient unit is very important. The study has implications for ensuring consumer voices are heard in all aspects of their care delivery.

A systematic review on the structured handover interventions between nurses in improving patient safety outcomes

AIM

This review aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of structured handovers in improving patient outcomes in the wards.

BACKGROUND

Studies have reported that the lack of quality handovers is one of the main causes of adverse effects.

EVALUATION

A search over six electronic databases: MEDLINE; CINAHL; Web of Science; EMBASE; Scopus; and CENTRAL via Ovid concluded nine studies and synthesized by two independent reviewers based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement was used to guide the undertaking of this review and meta-analysis. All studies published up to February 2019 were considered in this review.

KEY ISSUES

This review has demonstrated that structured handovers reduced the incidences of patient complications, medication errors and general adverse events. However, the results were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Current structured handover formats were effective in reducing problematic handovers such as omission of information, inaccurate information and documentation errors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

Although there is limited high-quality and rigorous research conducted to gain a clearer understanding of the impacts on patient-related outcomes in nursing care, structured handovers remained effective in reducing the number of mistakes in information transfer.

Patient and family engagement as a potential approach for improving patient safety: A systematic review

AIMS

To obtain a comprehensive insight of the impact of patient and family engagement on patient safety and identify issues in implementing this approach.

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement is increasingly emerging as a potential approach for improving patient safety.

DESIGN

Mixed method multilevel synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrance Library (January 2009-April 2018).

REVIEW METHODS

The review was conducted according to the principles recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review and in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Forty-two relevant studies were identified. Common intervention groups included 'direct care' and 'organization' levels with 'consultation' and 'involvement' approaches, while the 'health system' level and 'partnership and shared leadership' approaches were rarely implemented. Findings revealed positive effects of the interventions on patient safety. Most study participants expressed their willingness to engage in or support patient and family engagement. However, existing gaps and barriers in implementing patient and family engagement were identified.

CONCLUSION

Future research should further focus on issuing consensus guidelines for implementing patient and family engagement in patient safety, extending the research scope for all aspects of patient and family engagement and patient safety and identifying priority areas for action that is suitable for each health facility.

IMPACT

Policymakers should issue guidelines for implementing patient and family engagement in healthcare systems which would enable healthcare providers to implement patient and family engagement and improve patient safety appropriately and effectively.

The secrets to successful nurse bedside shift report implementation and sustainability

This literature review looks at articles on bedside shift report initiatives and offers strategies that may lead to sustained practice.

Reprint of: Patient participation in nursing bedside handover: A systematic mixed-methods review

BACKGROUND

Numerous reviews of nursing handover have been undertaken, but none have focused on the patient's role.

OBJECTIVES

To explore how patient participation in nursing shift-to-shift bedside handover can be enacted.

DESIGN

Systematic mixed- methods review.

DATA SOURCES

Three search strategies were undertaken in July-August 2016: database searching, backwards citation searching and forward citation searching. To be included, papers had to either be research or quality improvement (QI) projects focusing on the patient role. Fifty-four articles were retrieved, including 21 studies and 25 QI projects.

REVIEW METHODS

Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal was undertaken systematically by two reviewers. Research studies and QI projects were synthesised separately using thematic synthesis, then the results of this synthesis were combined using a mixed-method synthesis table.

RESULTS

Segregated synthesis of research of patients' perceptions revealed two contrasting categories; patient-centred handover and nurse-centred handover. Segregated synthesis of research of nurses' perceptions included three categories: viewing the patient as an information resource; dealing with confidential and sensitive information; and enabling patient participation. The segregated synthesis of QI projects included two categories: nurse barriers to enacting patient participation in bedside handover; and involving patients in beside handover. Once segregated findings were configured, we discovered that the patient's role in bedside handover involves contributing clinical information related to their care or progress, which may influence patient safety. Barriers related to nurses' discomfort encouraging patient participation and worries for sharing confidential and sensitive information. The way nurses approach patients, and how patient-centred they are, constitute further potential barriers. Strategies to improve patient participation in handover include training nurses, making handovers predictable for patients and increasing the interpersonal approach during handover.

CONCLUSIONS

Using research and QI projects allowed diverse findings to expand each other and identify gaps between research and heuristic knowledge. Our review showed the tension between standardising handovers and making them predictable for patient participation, while promoting tailored and flexible handovers. Further investigation of this issue is required, to understand how to train nurses to achieve this and prepare patients to do this. Many barriers and strategies identified were from QI projects and the nurse perspective, thus caution interpreting results is required. We recommend steps be taken in the future to ensure high quality QI projects.

Improved patient satisfaction 2 years after introducing person-centred handover in an oncological inpatient care setting

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate patients' satisfaction with care, 2 years after the introduction of person-centred handover (PCH) in an oncological inpatient setting, and to describe patients' perceptions of individualised care.

BACKGROUND

To obtain higher levels of patient satisfaction, bedside nursing handovers have been evaluated with positive results. One such model is PCH, which blends aspects of person-centred care with the bedside report and provides the opportunity for nursing staff and patients to perform the handover together.

DESIGN

A survey-based design was used with one data collection period. Patient satisfaction scores were compared with baseline data from a previous study that has been conducted in the same wards.

METHOD

Patient satisfaction was measured with the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire, and individualised care was assessed with the Individualized Care Scale. A total of 120 adult patients with cancer were invited to participate from August 2017-March 2018. Of these, 90 chose to participate. The STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies was used when preparing the paper.

RESULTS

Compared to the previous study, statistically significant improvements in patient satisfaction were observed in the subscales "Exchange of information between caregivers" and "Nurses' information provision" postimplementation of PCH. Regarding patients' perceptions of individualised care, the highest scores were in the ICS-A subscale "Clinical situation" and ICS-B "Decisional control," while "Personal life situation" scored the lowest overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Person-centred handover seems to have sustainable positive effects on important outcomes regarding patient satisfaction. A novel finding is the positive impact on nurses' information provision, indicating that PCH can facilitate effective information exchange between patients and nurses.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Person-centred handover seems to improve patients' satisfaction with nurses' provision and exchange of information. Nurses and managers should carefully consider the implementation process of PCH and evaluate its long-term effects. PCH can be recommended in the oncology inpatient setting.

Observations of nursing staff compliance to a checklist for person-centred handovers - a quality improvement project

Nursing shift‐to‐shift handovers are important as they impact the care quality indicators such as safety, patient satisfaction and continuity. However, nurses’ handovers have also been criticised and described as unstructured and ineffective. To improve the handovers and involve patients and their loved ones in the process, a person‐centred handover (PCH) model performed at bedside has been developed and tested at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. This study reports on the nursing staffs’ compliance to a checklist used for the newly introduced PCH model. A total of 43 PCH sessions were observed at two acute care wards, using a structured observation protocol. None of the observed handover sessions included all the 13 PCH checklist subcomponents. The checklist was used in 18 (44%) of the observed handover sessions. A statistically significant higher number of subcomponents were observed when the nurses used the PCH checklist (6.4 vs. 4.5 subcomponents, p < 0.05). The mean time spent on each PCH was 6 minutes. In 56% of the sessions, the patients were observed to actively participate in the handover. Overall, the nursing staffs’ compliance to the PCH checklist needs to be improved. The observations suggest that training on communication‐oriented tasks would be beneficial to establish a person‐centred handover process.

Patient safety after implementation of a coproduced family centered communication programme: multicenter before and after intervention study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether medical errors, family experience, and communication processes improved after implementation of an intervention to standardize the structure of healthcare provider-family communication on family centered rounds.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter before and after intervention study.

SETTING

Pediatric inpatient units in seven North American hospitals, 17 December 2014 to 3 January 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients admitted to study units (3106 admissions, 13171 patient days); 2148 parents or caregivers, 435 nurses, 203 medical students, and 586 residents.

INTERVENTION

Families, nurses, and physicians coproduced an intervention to standardize healthcare provider-family communication on ward rounds ("family centered rounds"), which included structured, high reliability communication on bedside rounds emphasizing health literacy, family engagement, and bidirectional communication; structured, written real-time summaries of rounds; a formal training programme for healthcare providers; and strategies to support teamwork, implementation, and process improvement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Medical errors (primary outcome), including harmful errors (preventable adverse events) and non-harmful errors, modeled using Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations clustered by site; family experience; and communication processes (eg, family engagement on rounds). Errors were measured via an established systematic surveillance methodology including family safety reporting.

RESULTS

The overall rate of medical errors (per 1000 patient days) was unchanged (41.2 (95% confidence interval 31.2 to 54.5) pre-intervention v 35.8 (26.9 to 47.7) post-intervention, P=0.21), but harmful errors (preventable adverse events) decreased by 37.9% (20.7 (15.3 to 28.1) v 12.9 (8.9 to 18.6), P=0.01) post-intervention. Non-preventable adverse events also decreased (12.6 (8.9 to 17.9) v 5.2 (3.1 to 8.8), P=0.003). Top box (eg, "excellent") ratings for six of 25 components of family reported experience improved; none worsened. Family centered rounds occurred more frequently (72.2% (53.5% to 85.4%) v 82.8% (64.9% to 92.6%), P=0.02). Family engagement 55.6% (32.9% to 76.2%) v 66.7% (43.0% to 84.1%), P=0.04) and nurse engagement (20.4% (7.0% to 46.6%) v 35.5% (17.0% to 59.6%), P=0.03) on rounds improved. Families expressing concerns at the start of rounds (18.2% (5.6% to 45.3%) v 37.7% (17.6% to 63.3%), P=0.03) and reading back plans (4.7% (0.7% to 25.2%) v 26.5% (12.7% to 7.3%), P=0.02) increased. Trainee teaching and the duration of rounds did not change significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Although overall errors were unchanged, harmful medical errors decreased and family experience and communication processes improved after implementation of a structured communication intervention for family centered rounds coproduced by families, nurses, and physicians. Family centered care processes may improve safety and quality of care without negatively impacting teaching or duration of rounds.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02320175.

Patient participation in nursing bedside handover: A systematic mixed-methods review

BACKGROUND

Numerous reviews of nursing handover have been undertaken, but none have focused on the patients' role.

OBJECTIVES

To explore how patient participation in nursing shift-to-shift bedside handover can be enacted.

DESIGN

Systematic mixed- methods review.

DATA SOURCES

Three search strategies were undertaken in July-August 2016: database searching, backwards citation searching and forward citation searching. To be included, papers had to either be research or quality improvement (QI) projects focusing on the patient role. Fifty-four articles were retrieved, including 21 studies and 25 QI projects.

REVIEW METHODS

Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal was undertaken systematically by two reviewers. Research studies and QI projects were synthesised separately using thematic synthesis, then the results of this synthesis were combined using a mixed-method synthesis table.

RESULTS

Segregated synthesis of research of patients' perceptions revealed two contrasting categories; patient-centred handover and nurse-centred handover. Segregated synthesis of research of nurses' perceptions included three categories: viewing the patient as an information resource; dealing with confidential and sensitive information; and enabling patient participation. The segregated synthesis of QI projects included two categories: nurse barrier to enacting patient participation in bedside handover; and involving patients in beside handover. Once segregated findings were configured, we discovered that the patient's role in bedside handover involves contributing clinical information related to their care or progress, which may influence patient safety. Barriers related to nurses' concerns for the consequences of encouraging patient participation, worries for sharing confidential and sensitive information and feeling hesitant in changing their handover methods. The way nurses approach patients, and how patient-centred they are, constitute further potential barriers. Strategies to improve patient participation in handover include training nurses, making handovers predictable for patients and involving both patients and nurses throughout the change process.

CONCLUSIONS

Using research and QI projects allowed diverse findings to expand each other and identify gaps between research and heuristic knowledge. Our review showed the tension between standardising handovers and making them predictable for patient participation, while promoting tailored and flexible handovers. Further investigation of this issue is required, to understand how to train nurses and patient views. Many barriers and strategies identified were from QI projects and the nurse perspective, thus caution interpreting results is required. We recommend steps be taken in the future to ensure high quality QI projects.

Patient satisfaction after implementation of person-centred handover in oncological inpatient care - A cross-sectional study

Effective nurse shift-to-shift handover is a prerequisite for high-quality inpatient care. Combining person-centeredness with the need for improved handover rituals, we introduced and evaluated person-centered handover (PCH) in an oncological inpatient setting. PCH is the shift-to-shift nursing report performed together with the patient according to a set structure focused on patient participation, relevant clinical information, and patient safety. Non-verbal handover, standard at the department, is conducted via the electronic health record, in absence of the patient, and without a set structure. The aim of the study was to compare person-centered handover with non-verbal handover in an oncological inpatient setting with regard to patient satisfaction. A cross-sectional design featuring two points of measurement at one intervention ward and two control wards was applied. The EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire was used for measuring patient satisfaction. Baseline measurements were taken during the spring of 2014, when all three wards used a non-verbal handover model, and included responses from 116 patients. Follow-up measurements (comparing PCH and non-verbal handover) involved 209 patients and were on-going from September 2014 to May 2015. After the introduction of PCH, one change in patient satisfaction was detected regarding the subscale measuring exchange of information between caregivers. Patients from the intervention ward scored statistically higher after the implementation of PCH when compared to the control wards (p = .0058). The difference remained after a multivariate regression analysis controlling for clinical variables. In conclusion, PCH is feasible in oncological inpatient care but does not seem to affect patient satisfaction.

Shift-to-Shift Handoff Effects on Patient Safety and Outcomes

Multiple health care organizations have identified handoffs as a source of clinical errors; however, few studies have linked handoff interventions to improved patient outcomes. This systematic review of English-language research articles, published January 2008 to May 2015 and focusing on shift-to-shift handoff interventions and patient outcomes, yielded 10 774 unique articles. Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria, measuring each of the following: patient falls (n = 7), reportable events (n = 6), length of stay (n = 4), mortality (n = 4), code calls (n = 4), medication errors (n = 4), medical errors (n = 3), procedural complications (n = 2), pressure ulcers (n = 2), weekend discharges (n = 2), and nosocomial infections (n = 2). One study each also measured time to first intervention, restraint use, overnight transfusions, and out-of-hours deteriorations. Studies that reported funding had higher quality scores. It is difficult to identify trends in the handoff research because of simultaneous implementation of multiple interventions and heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes measured, and settings. The authors call for increased handoff research funding, especially for studies that include patient outcome measures.