Introduction of a new electronic medical weekend handover at Tunbridge Wells Hospital

Improving Clinical Handover on an Electronic Communication Platform: A Quality Improvement Project

Background National guidance stipulates the essential components of a safe handover. Shift-based work and the COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increased turnover and re-deployment of staff into new clinical areas, creating challenges in delivering effective handovers. Aim The aim of this quality improvement project (QIP) was to improve adherence to a local standardised handover proforma to improve the quality and consistency of handovers. Methods Handovers were assessed by measuring the completion rates of the essential components of a safe handover as outlined in the national guidance. Data were collected from an electronic handover system which follows the Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendations (SBAR) structure, and percentage completion rates obtained for each component assessed. Following baseline measurement, four Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were completed between August 2020 and February 2021 across two junior doctor rotations and during a COVID surge rota. Results A total of 710 handovers were assessed across the four PDSA cycles. There were overall improvements in the percentage completion rates of each component compared to baseline: Under 'Situation', admission dates increased by 13.7%, estimated discharge date by 33.3% and 100% completion rate maintained for the presenting complaint. Under 'Background', past medical history remained static, with a 12.1% increase in documentation of a social history. Under 'Assessment', escalation status increased by 335%, issues list by 242% and important updates by 35.2%. Under 'Recommendations', completion rate for plans was maintained at 100%. Conclusions Our findings demonstrated an overall improvement in the majority of components of the handover proforma. Challenges remain with the rotation of junior doctors through different specialties leading to a loss of institutional knowledge and reduced longevity of the intervention's effect, exacerbated by the introduction of the COVID surge rota. A long-lasting improvement may require a shift to a completely electronic patient records system (ePR) which incorporates a handover tool.

Assessment and improvement of junior doctor handover in the emergency department

Introduction

Effective handover between junior doctors is widely accepted as essential for patient safety. The British Medical Association in association with the National Health Service (NHS) National Patient Safety Agency and NHS Modernisation Agency have produced clear guidance regarding the contents and setting for a safe and efficient handover. We aimed to understand current junior doctor’s opinions on the handover process in a London emergency department (ED), with subsequent assessment, and any necessary improvement, of handover practices within the department.

Methods

In a London ED, a baseline survey was completed by the senior house officer (SHO) cohort to gauge current opinions of the existing handover process. Concurrently, a blinded prospective audit of handover practises was conducted. Multiple improvement strategies were subsequently implemented and assessed via Plan–Do–Study–Act (PDSA) cycles. A standard operating procedure was initially introduced and ‘rolled out’ throughout the department. This intervention was followed by development of an electronic handover note to ease completion of a satisfactory handover. Additional surveys were conducted to continually assess SHO opinion on how the handover process was developing. The final improvement strategy was formal handover teaching at the SHO induction.

Results

Baseline audit and SHO survey highlighted several opportunities for improvement. 5 handover components were deemed essential: (1) documented handover note; (2) doctor’s names; (3) history of presenting complaint; (4) ED actions; and (5) ongoing plan. The frequency of these components saw significant improvement by completion of the final PDSA. Following SHO rotation, all of the essential components fell, only to recover after the next improvement strategy.

Conclusions

Junior doctors in a London ED were not satisfied with the current SHO handover process, and handover practices were not adequate. While the rotational nature of the SHO cohort makes sustained change challenging, implementation of thoughtful and realistic improvement strategies can significantly improve handover quality.

Introduction of an electronic weekend handover system at a London university teaching hospital

Handover has long been identified as a potential source for error that can have direct consequences for patient care. The current weekend handover system at University College Hospital, London, involved a verbal handover meeting with a variety of methods used to collate information. A new handover system was introduced that involved the pre-population of a spreadsheet before attending the handover meeting. Doctors involved in the handover process were canvassed for opinion before and after the introduction of the new system, and logistical data were collected. The new system reduced the amount of time spent preparing for, and delivering, handover, and was deemed to be safer and to improve adherence to the Royal College of Physicians' guidelines for handover, including specification of level of doctor to perform handover and prioritisation of handover.

Making the weekend work: a local quality improvement project to establish and improve the quality of weekend handover

Handover is widely identified by the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death, the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and Health Foundation as an area that can lead to shortcomings in patient care. We recognised that the current weekend handover process in the Trauma and Orthopaedics department at Frimley Park Hospital was dated, time-consuming and did not promote handover of sufficient patient details. The Royal College of Surgeons, British Medical Association and RCP have guidelines on handover. Our aim was to use these to establish the quality of handovers and introduce methods to better the accuracy and effectiveness of weekend handover in the department, thus improving patient care and safety. Initially, we measured the quality of the existing handover documentation for how comprehensively it was completed. We then implemented a two-step change, reauditing each step, resulting in a handover tool on the trust intranet. Finally, we repeated our audit to monitor sustainability. The 10 categories measured were: 'Patient name', 'Date of birth', 'Hospital number', 'Date of admission', 'Location', 'Consultant', 'Admission reason', 'Date of operation', 'Frequency of review' and discharge paperwork ('TTO'). The original handover documentation had good compliance with 'Patient name' (99%), 'Hospital number' (94%) and 'Admission reason' (91%) but was poor in all other categories, ranging from 12% to 84%. The only category that met its standard was 'Admission reason'. Almost every category improved with the new intranet tool. Five areas met their standard ('Patient name', 'Location', 'Consultant', 'Admission reason' and 'Frequency of review'). Specific prompts resulted in 100% compliance for 'Frequency of review'. The poorest compliance was again seen for 'TTO' (18%). In a short four months, we created an intranet handover tool that resulted in significant and sustainable improvements in the quality, detail and accuracy of handovers, making identification of sick patients safer and more efficient.

Introduction of a Microsoft Excel-based unified electronic weekend handover document in Acute and General Medicine in a DGH: aims, outcomes and challenges

On-call weekends in medicine can be a busy and stressful time for junior doctors, as they are responsible for a larger pool of patients, most of whom they would have never met. Clinical handover to the weekend team is extremely important and any communication errors may have a profound impact on patient care, potentially even resulting in avoidable harm or death. Several senior clinical bodies have issued guidelines on best practice in written and verbal handover. These include: standardisation, use of pro forma documents prompting doctors to document vital information (such as ceiling of care/resuscitation status) and prioritisation according to clinical urgency. These guidelines were not consistently followed in our hospital site at the onset of 2014 and junior doctors were becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the handover processes. An initial audit of handover documents used across the medical division on two separate weekends in January 2014, revealed high variability in compliance with documentation of key information. For example, ceiling of care was documented for only 14-42% of patients and resuscitation status in 26-72% of patients respectively. Additionally, each ward used their own self-designed pro forma and patients were not prioritised by clinical urgency. Within six months from the introduction of a standardised, hospital-wide weekend handover pro forma across the medical division and following initial improvements to its layout, ceiling of therapy and resuscitation status were documented in approximately 80% of patients (with some minor variability). Moreover, 100% of patients in acute medicine and 75% of those in general medicine were prioritised by clinical urgency and all wards used the same handover pro forma.

Implementing an electronic patient handover system

BACKGROUND

Clear communication among health-care teams is paramount for safe patient care and effective handover. Advances in information technology have led to an increased use of electronic systems within modern health care. This quality improvement project introduced an electronic patient handover system that was intended to improve the accuracy of patient handover lists and be readily available to all members of the health-care team.

METHODS

A quality improvement project was undertaken to assess the effect of introducing an electronic patient handover system on maintenance workload and list accuracy.

RESULTS

List errors were common before the introduction of the electronic patient handover system, commonly patient location or a patient being incorrectly omitted from the list. These errors decreased significantly after the introduction of the electronic system (P<0.005 and 0.04 respectively). The workload associated with its maintenance also decreased (P<0.005) because many data fields were pre-populated by the software. This resulted in fewer instances of patients being missed on ward rounds (P<0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Through modifying existing information technology infrastructure, a centrally maintained, widely accessible electronic handover system was introduced. This reduced the workload associated with maintaining handover lists and the rate of errors.