Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis

Patient Handoff Practices at the Epilepsy Centers in the United States: A Survey of the Medical Directors

PURPOSE

Communication failure is one of the most significant causes of medical errors. Providing care to patients with seizures at comprehensive epilepsy centers requires uninterrupted coverage and a multidisciplinary approach. However, handoff practices in these settings have not been comprehensively assessed, and recommendations for their standardization are currently lacking. The aim of this observational study was to define the scope of existing practices for patient handoffs across epilepsy centers in the United States and provide relevant recommendations.

METHODS

A 79-question survey was developed to establish the patterns of transition of care for patients undergoing continuous EEG recording, including the periodicity of handoffs and specifics of the relevant workflow. With permission from the National Association of Epilepsy Centers (NAEC), the survey was distributed to the medical directors of all Level 3 and 4 NAEC-accredited epilepsy centers in the United States.

RESULTS

The responses were obtained from 70 institutions yielding a survey response rate of 26%. Of these, more than 77% had established weekly handoff processes for both the epilepsy monitoring unit and continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring services. However, only 53% and 43% of centers had procedures for daily service transfers for the patients admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit or the patients undergoing cEEG, respectively. The patterns of handoffs were complex and utilized group handoffs in < 50% of institutions. In most centers (>70%), patient data transmitted through handoffs included history, clinical information, and EEG findings. However, templates were not applied to standardize this information. All participants agreed or strongly agreed that a culture of patient safety was maintained in their place of practice; however, 12% of participants felt that insufficient time was allowed to discuss these patients or carry out the handoffs without interruptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing handoff practices are not uniform or fully established across epilepsy centers in the United States. This study recommends that guidelines for formal handoff procedures be developed and introduced as a quality metric for all NAEC-accredited epilepsy centers.

Physician inpatient handoffs-Patient and physician outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prior reviews have shown that interventions to improve inpatient handoffs are inconsistently associated with improvement in patient outcomes. This systematic review examines the effectiveness of inpatient handoff interventions on outcomes affecting patients and physicians, including objective measures when reported (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022309326).

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched on January 13th, 2022. We included experimental or quasi-experimental studies that examined handoff communication between inpatient physicians and reported patient clinical, patient experiential, physician experiential, or cost and utilization outcomes. Studies were excluded if they examined handoffs between facilities or levels of care, or only reported subjective measures of patient safety or physician experience. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-1 and RoB-2 tools.

RESULTS

Of the 42 included studies, six were randomized controlled trials. Most studies were conducted at academic centers (67%) and involved only residents (64%). An educational intervention was used in 52% of studies and a structural intervention was used in 43%, with 9% using both. Adverse events were significantly improved in three of 16 studies, medical errors in three of seven studies, and length of stay in three of seven studies. Four studies examined mortality, and none reported a significant improvement. Studies that used both structural and educational components reported significant improvements more frequently.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature is mixed on the impact of efforts to improve handoffs, though there are few randomized trials. Few studies reported patient experiential or cost/utilization outcomes, or involved hospitalist physicians, which represent potential areas for future research.

The portfolio effect: an opportunity for improving handoffs quality in ICU

BACKGROUND

Handoffs are a major determinant of patient's safety but their implementation remains heterogeneous and non-standardized. Organizational factors, including the order in which individual cases are handled within the handoff, may play a role in their quality. We aimed to confirm the existence of the portfolio effect (e.g. a decrease in duration allocated to individual cases as the global handoff progresses) in ICU's morning medical handoffs.

METHODS

Two research assistants observed the morning handoffs in two ICUs (ICU-1, a 20-bed trauma and surgical ICU and ICU-2 a 10-bed medical and surgical ICU) within a university hospital, over a 6-month period. They were trained to measure the duration of each case (i.e., the handoff of a single patient). Patients' socio-demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records. The effect of the case position within the global handoff on its duration was determined using a linear regression after log transformation of duration. The case position was categorized as either before or after the median position (first and second halves). Covariates clinically associated with handoff duration were included in the model (age, sex, Charlson comorbidities index, SAPS II score, number of organ supports, center (ICU-1 or ICU-2) and reason for admission).

RESULTS

2485 individual cases nested in 169 morning handoffs and related to 494 patients' stays were observed. The mean (± SD) duration of the morning handoff was 60 minutes (± 12.5) in ICU-1 and 35.2 minutes (± 10.6) in ICU-2 with a mean number of cases presented of 18.9 (± 1.3) and 9.3 (± 1.0) respectively. The mean (± SD) duration of a case was 175 seconds (± 108). Trauma stays, patients severity and comorbidities, and the number of organ supports were associated with longer case handoffs. Asjusting for these covariates, cases in the second half were shorter compared to cases in the first half (RR 0.65, 95%CI (0.51 - 0.80)).

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the existence of a portfolio effect within ICU handoffs, emphasizing that interventions targeting handoffs' improvement should focus on the content and the setting. We suggest avoiding the presentation of a same patient systematically at the end of the round.

Biased Language in Simulated Handoffs and Clinician Recall and Attitudes

Importance

Poor-quality handoffs can lead to medical errors when transitioning patient care. Biased language within handoffs may contribute to errors and lead to disparities in health care delivery.

Objective

To compare clinical information recall accuracy and attitudes toward patients among trainees in paired cases of biased vs neutral language in simulated handoffs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Surveys administered from April 29 to June 15 and from July 20 to October 10, 2023, included 3 simulated verbal handoffs, randomized between biased and neutral, and measured clinical information recall, attitudes toward patients, and key takeaways after each handoff. Participants included residents in internal medicine, pediatrics, and internal medicine-pediatrics and senior medical students at 2 academic medical centers in different geographic regions of the US. Data were analyzed from November 2023 to June 2024.

Exposures

Each participant received 3 handoffs that were based on real handoffs about Black patients at 1 academic center. These handoffs were each randomized to either a biased or neutral version. Biased handoffs had 1 of 3 types of bias: stereotype, blame, or doubt. The order of handoff presentation was also randomized. Internal medicine and pediatrics residents received slightly different surveys, tailored for their specialty. Internal medicine-pediatrics residents received the pediatric survey. Medical students were randomly assigned the survey type.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Each handoff was followed by a clinical information recall question, an adapted version of the Provider Attitudes Toward Sickle Cell Patients Scale (PASS), and 3 free-response takeaways.

Results

Of 748 trainees contacted, 169 participants (142 residents and 27 medical students) completed the survey (23% overall response rate), distributed across institutions, residency programs, and years of training (95 female [56%]; mean [SD] age, 28.6 [2.3] years). Participants who received handoffs with blame-based bias had less accurate information recall than those who received neutral handoffs (77% vs 93%; P = .005). Those who reported bias as a key takeaway of the handoff had lower clinical information recall accuracy than those who did not (85% vs 93%; P = .01). Participants had less positive attitudes toward patients per PASS scores after receiving biased compared with neutral handoffs (mean scores, 22.9 [3.3] vs 25.2 [2.7]; P < .001). More positive attitudes toward patients were associated with higher clinical information recall accuracy (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this survey study of residents and medical students, biased handoffs impeded accurate transfer of key clinical information and decreased empathy, potentially endangering patients and worsening health disparities. Handoff standardization is critical to addressing racial bias and improving patient safety.

Streamlining Telecommunications Center and Interfacility Patient Throughput to a Pediatric Emergency Department by Utilizing an Electronic Handoff: A Quality Improvement Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Effective handoffs are critical for patient safety and high-quality care. The pediatric emergency department serves as the initial reception for patients where optimal communication is crucial. The complexities of interfacility handoffs can result in information loss due to lack of standardization. The aim of our project was a 50% reduction in monthly calls routed through the communication center from 157 to 78, for interfacility transfers to the emergency department from outpatient sites within our organization over a 1-year period, through utilization of an electronic handoff activity.

METHODS

We designed a quality improvement project in a tertiary care pediatric hospital to improve the process of interfacility transfer. The initiative aimed to streamline the transfer of patients from ambulatory, urgent care, and nurse triage encounters to the pediatric emergency department by using the electronic health record. The primary outcome measure was number of monthly calls received by the telecommunications center for these transfers.Our process measure was tracked by measuring the utilization of the electronic handoff. In addition, the number of safety events reported because of information lost through using the electronic handoff served as a balancing measure.

RESULTS

One year after the enterprise-wide rollout of the handoff, the telecommunications center was receiving an average of 29 calls per month versus 157 at time of study initiation, a decrease of 81.5%. Monthly usage increased from zero to an average of 544 during the same period. The project was continued after the initial 12-month data collection and demonstrated stability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initiative facilitated the safe and efficient transfer of patients and streamlined workflows without sacrificing quality of patient care. Our telecommunications center has been freed up for other tasks with fewer interruptions during patient throughput. Next steps will analyze the encounters of transferred patients to further optimize patient flow at our organization.

Improving Patient Handoffs and Transitions in Care Among Residents: A Chief Resident-Led Initiative

INTRODUCTION

Effective handoff between pediatric residents is crucial to ensure continuity of care and patient safety. Omissions in information and communication breakdowns can be associated with uncertainty in clinical decision-making and adverse patient events. In our role as chief residents, we were notified of an increase in patient safety alerts due to communication failures and gaps during handoff. We aimed to identify areas for improvement and implement strategies to improve competence in handoff among pediatric residents. We also explored pediatric residents' confidence levels regarding handoff procedures and the effectiveness of our interventions in the transfer of care.

METHODS

Two chief residents conducted direct handoff observations of residents during the transfer of care of inpatients over six months. Residents were scored using a handoff checklist, and formative feedback was provided to each resident after the observation session. Deficits and barriers to properly executed handoff were noted and used to develop a series of handoff workshops. Pre- and post-workshop confidence in handoff skills was calculated from an average of each five-point Likert scale item (1=not at all confident, 5=very confident).

RESULTS

 Forty pediatric residents were assessed performing inpatient handoff. We observed 38 handoff sessions. All of these involved face-to-face interactions with verbal and written communication in the I-PASS (illness severity, patient summary, action list, situation awareness and contingency planning, and synthesis by the receiver) format, allowing the receiver of the information to clarify issues and ask questions. Protocol failures were identified in 50% of the handoffs observed. This included disruptions during handoff (5%), incorrect relay of patient information (26%), prioritizing sick patients (26%), omission of care tasks (10%), and provision of contingency planning (31%). Forty residents participated in the handoff workshops. Regarding confidence in handoff before and after the workshop, 67% of residents initially reported feeling "very confident" or "fairly confident" in their patient handoff skills. After the completion of the workshops, 98% of residents reported "fairly confident" or "very confident" in their ability to perform handoff. Pre- and post-workshop surveys demonstrated self-perceived increases in confidence (P<0.001). Following the completion of the workshops, we conducted observations and found that residents properly executed handoffs, and we received no further patient safety alerts regarding communication breakdowns.

CONCLUSIONS

 We identified several protocol failures in effective handoff among pediatric residents. Chief resident-led targeted workshops addressed these lapses, improved the effectiveness of patient handoffs, and reduced patient safety events related to breakdowns in communication. Our interventions increased confidence in handoff among pediatric residents, and these effects were sustained over time.

The Post-Operative Handoff: Perceptions and Preferences of Pediatric Hospitalists and Surgeons

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative communication errors contribute to patient harm and excess costs. There are no existing standards for postoperative handoff to the acute care inpatient unit. We aimed to compare the experiences and preferences of pediatric hospitalists and surgeons about the content and timing of this handoff.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional multisite survey of pediatric hospitalists and surgeons at 4 hospitals using a novel survey tool developed through a systematic 7-step process. We collected data on the perceived frequency of communication for 37 handoff elements and how essential each element was for an ideal handoff. We used 5-point Likert scales of communication frequency and essentialness. Respondents identified perceived and preferred handoff timing. Mention frequency and timing data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test, respectively.

RESULTS

Seventy hospitalists (61%) and 27 surgeons (25%) responded to the survey. Over half of both hospitalist and surgeon respondents rated 13 handoff elements a 5 on the essentialness Likert scale. Surgeons perceived that 33 handoff elements were mentioned significantly more frequently than perceived by hospitalists (P < .05). Of hospitalists, 58% preferred that handoff occur immediately before the patient leaves the postanesthesia care unit. Of surgeons, 60% preferred that handoff occur immediately postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 13 core elements we identified may facilitate the development of a standardized handoff checklist for postoperative communication between surgeons and hospitalists on acute care units. Areas of future study could include checklist validation, audits of handoff practice, and qualitative research on handoff preferences.

Timing of Intraoperative Transitions of Care Among Anesthesiologists Is Not Associated With Postoperative Adverse Outcomes: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The majority of published research suggests that anesthesia handovers during major surgical procedures are associated with unintended harmful consequences. It is still unclear if the number or quality of the transition of care is the main driver of the adverse outcomes. There is even less data if the timing of the anesthesiologist handovers during the critical portion of the anesthetic continuum (induction or emergence versus surgical period) plays a role in patient outcomes. Therefore, we investigated if the anesthesiologist handovers during induction and emergence are associated with adverse patient outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective investigation included noncardiac surgical procedures occurring between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2019 that had exactly 1 attending anesthesiologist handover. We categorized transitions of care between attending anesthesiologists as being before incision, between incision and closing, and after closing. Our primary outcome was a composite of 6 categories of surgical complications and in-hospital mortality. We created logistic generalized estimating equation models to estimate the average relative effect odds ratio between each pair of the 3 transition timing groups across the components of the composite outcome. Inverse probability of treatment weights were used to mitigate confounding on a host of baseline variables. We used Bonferroni correction to adjust for multiple comparisons between the transition groups.

RESULTS

In total, we studied 36,937 procedures with exactly 1 attending anesthesiologist handover. Of these records, 4370 had the transition during induction, 24,999 between incision and closure, and 7568 during emergence. No differences were found between the transition periods and the composite outcome. The estimated average relative effect odds ratio (98.3% confidence interval [CI]) across the components of the composite outcome was as follows: (1.0002 [0.81-1.24], P = .99) between the induction and surgical period; (1.10 [0.87-1.40], P = .32) between the induction and emergence periods; and (0.91 [0.79-1.04], P = .08) between the emergence and surgical periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of intraoperative handover among attending anesthesiologists during noncardiac surgery is not associated with adverse patient outcomes.

Where the Postanesthesia Care Unit and Intensive Care Unit Meet

The intensive care unit (ICU) was born from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). In today's hospital systems, there remains a lot of overlap in the care missions of each location. The patient populations share many similarities and many of the same care, technology, and care protocols apply to patients in both units. As shown by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is immense value in maintaining protocols, processes, and staffing models for the safe care of ICU patients in the PACU when ICU demands exceed capacity.

Improving clinical reasoning and communication during handover: An intervention study of the BRIEF-C tool

BACKGROUND

Existing handover communication tools often lack a clear theoretical foundation, have limited psychometric evidence, and overlook effective communication strategies for enhancing diagnostic reasoning. This oversight becomes critical as communication breakdowns during handovers have been implicated in poor patient care. To address these issues, we developed a structured communication tool: Background, Responsible diagnosis, Included differential diagnosis, Excluded differential diagnosis, Follow-up, and Communication (BRIEF-C). It is informed by cognitive bias theory, shows evidence of reliability and validity of its scores, and includes strategies for actively sending and receiving information in medical handovers.

DESIGN

A pre-test post-test intervention study.

SETTING

Inpatient internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery units at one tertiary care hospital.

INTERVENTION

The BRIEF-C tool was presented to internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery faculty and residents who participated in an in-person educational session, followed by a 2-week period where they practised using it with feedback.

MEASUREMENTS

Clinical handovers were audiorecorded over 1 week for the pre- and again for the post-periods, then transcribed for analysis. Two faculty raters from internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery scored the transcripts of handovers using the BRIEF-C framework. The two raters were blinded to the time periods.

RESULTS

A principal component analysis identified two subscales on the BRIEF-C: diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication, with high interitem consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.82 and 0.99, respectively). One sample t-test indicated significant improvement in diagnostic clinical reasoning (pre-test: M=0.97, SD=0.50; post-test: M=1.31, SD=0.64; t(64)=4.26, p<0.05, medium to large Cohen's d=0.63) and communication (pre-test: M=0.02, SD=0.16; post-test: M=0.48, SD=0.83); t(64)=4.52, p<0.05, large Cohen's d=0.83).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates evidence supporting the reliability and validity of scores on the BRIEF-C as good indicators of diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication shared during handovers.

[Handoffs in the intensive care unit]

BACKGROUND

Effective handoffs in the intensive care unit (ICU) are key to patient safety.

PURPOSE

This article aims to raise awareness of the significance of structured and thorough handoffs and highlights possible challenges as well as means for improvement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on the available literature, the evidence regarding handoffs in ICUs is summarized and suggestions for practical implementation are derived.

RESULTS

The quality of handoffs has an impact on patient safety. At the same time, communication in the intensive care setting is particularly challenging due to the complexity of cases, a disruptive work environment, and a multitude of inter- and intraprofessional interactions. Hierarchical team structures, deficiencies in feedback and error-management culture, (technical) language barriers in communication, as well as substantial physical and psychological stress may negatively influence the effectiveness of handoffs. Sets of interventions such as the implementation of checklists, mnemonics, and communication workshops contribute to a more structured and thorough handoff process and have the potential to significantly improve patient safety.

CONCLUSION

Effective handoffs are the cornerstone of high-quality and safe patient care but face particular challenges in ICUs. Interventional measures such as structuring handoff concepts and periodic communication trainings can help to improve handoffs and thus increase patient safety.

Implementing a Hospitalist Comanagement Service in Orthopaedic Surgery

➤ Hospitalist comanagement of patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery is a growing trend across the United States, yet its implementation in an academic tertiary care hospital can be complex and even contentious.➤ Hospitalist comanagement services lead to better identification of at-risk patients, optimization of patient care to prevent adverse events, and streamlining of the admission process, thereby enhancing the overall service efficiency.➤ A successful hospitalist comanagement service includes the identification of service stakeholders and leaders; frequent consensus meetings; a well-defined standardized framework, with goals, program metrics, and unified commands; and an occasional satisfaction assessment to update and improve the program.➤ In this article, we establish a step-by-step protocol for the implementation of a comanagement structure between orthopaedic and hospitalist services at a tertiary care center, outlining specific protocols and workflows for patient care and transfer procedures among various departments, particularly in emergency and postoperative situations.

A Discourse Study on Handover Communication Among Care Providers in a Residential Care Home for Persons with Intellectual Disabilities

Abundant research has focused on handovers among nurses and/or doctors in hospitals; far less is known about handovers among care providers in non-clinical contexts, such as care homes for the elderly or the disabled. Focusing on handovers in a residential care home for persons with intellectual disabilities (RCHID), this study argues that handover communication in non-clinical settings is equally important. Ineffective handovers can lead to the deterioration of the residents' health conditions, chaotic situations and even injuries to both care providers and care recipients. Staff in RCHIDs rely heavily on handover communication to obtain information about the residents' needs and to offer appropriate care services. Combining discourse analysis with interactional sociolinguistics, this study analyzes written and spoken discourses involved in handover communication among care providers in a typical RCHID in Hong Kong to investigate what and how communicative functions were achieved through the participants' language use. The data were collected by convenience sampling, including handwritten notes and handover recordings of twelve sessions. Then a group interview of seven care providers was conducted to obtain supplementary data. Findings suggest that handover communication includes informational and interpersonal functions. While information delivery is the main purpose, care providers also establish relationships with one another through small talk about care home residents. The results suggest potential drawbacks of the handovers, including illegible notes, inconsistent information collection, and low interactivity. This study proposes a model that elucidates the correlation between discourse, handover communication and healthcare services, and suggests strategies to enhance such communication.

Exploring Ward Team Handoffs of Overnight Admissions: Key Lessons from Field Observations

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic process is a dynamic, team-based activity that is an important aspect of ward rounds in teaching hospitals. However, few studies have examined how academic ward teams operate in areas such as diagnosis in the handoff of overnight admissions during ward rounds. This study draws key lessons from team interactions in the handoff process during ward rounds.

OBJECTIVE

To describe how ward teams operate in the handoff of patients admitted overnight during ward rounds, and to characterize the role of the bedside patient evaluation in this context.

DESIGN

A qualitative ethnographic approach using field observations and documentary analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Attending physicians, medical residents, and medical students on general medicine services in a single teaching hospital.

APPROACH

Thirty-five hours of observations were undertaken over a 4-month period. We purposively approached a diverse group of attendings who cover a range of clinical teaching experience, and obtained informed consent from all ward team members and observed patients. Thirty patient handoffs were observed across 5 ward teams with 45 team members. We conducted thematic analysis of researcher field notes and electronic health record documents using social cognitive theories to characterize the dynamic interactions occurring in the real clinical environment.

KEY RESULTS

Teams spent less time during ward rounds on verifying history and physical examination findings, performing bedside evaluations, and discussing differential diagnoses than other aspects (e.g., reviewing patient data in conference rooms) in the team handoff process of overnight admissions. Several team-based approaches to diagnosis and bedside patient evaluations were observed, including debriefing for learning and decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights potential strengths and missed opportunities for teaching, learning, and engaging directly with patients in the ward team handoff of patients admitted overnight. These findings may inform curriculum development, faculty training, and patient safety research.

Long-Term Sustainability and Adaptation of I-PASS Handovers

BACKGROUND

Inadequate communication during transitions of care is a major health care quality and safety vulnerability. In 2013 Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) embarked on a comprehensive training program using a standardized handover system (I-PASS) that had been shown to reduce adverse events by 30% even when not completely executed on each patient. In this cross-sectional study, the authors sought to characterize handover practices six years later.

METHODS

Using a standardized interview tool, the researchers evaluated handovers between responding clinicians in 10 departments and then validated these findings through direct observations, allowing for flexibility and customization in the I-PASS elements. The study qualitatively compared I-PASS element use in verbal handovers to MGH early postintervention data, as well as verbal and written handovers with the I-PASS Study Group's postintervention results.

RESULTS

The authors observed 156 verbal and reviewed 182 written patient handovers. Ninety percent of departments adhered at least partially to the I-PASS system. Average handover duration ranged from 0.6 to 2.1 minutes per established patient. The service with best I-PASS adherence also consistently included the most information per unit of time. Acknowledging substantial differences in study technique, MGH adherence was, on average, comparable or better on all I-PASS elements in verbal handovers and on three of four elements of written handovers compared with the I-PASS Study Group's postintervention results.

CONCLUSION

Although uptake has varied across services, six years after hospitalwide implementation of I-PASS, the majority of services are performing structured and sequenced handovers, most of which include some elements of the I-PASS system. Those services with the best I-PASS adherence conducted the most efficient handovers.

Improving handoff with the implementation of I-PASS at a tertiary oncology hospital

BACKGROUND

Lack of consistent and standardised handoffs is a leading cause of patient harm. With increased census in our hospital medicine (HM) service, failure to handoff using a standardised method has the potential to cause significant patient harm. We used a quality improvement methodology to standardise an existing and validated handoff tool within our HM team to improve handoff communication among providers and improve patient safety.

METHODS

A quality improvement team was charged with studying handoff communication among HM teams and between day and night shift providers at a tertiary oncology hospital. Multiple plan-do-study-act cycles were conducted, and process flow maps, root cause analysis and an affinity diagram were developed based on feedback from the HM team. The quality improvement team developed a plan to implement I-PASS (Illness severity, Patient summary, Action list, Situation awareness and contingency plan, and Synthesis by receiver) as the standardised handoff tool to be used among the providers in HM at the end of shift and for handoff to the nocturnal covering service. Rates of I-PASS use were collected before and after several educational interventions to encourage use of I-PASS and were displayed in a control chart. After the I-PASS interventions, HM providers were surveyed twice to evaluate the secondary outcomes: the tool's impact on workflow, perceptions of patient safety, ease of use and satisfaction with I-PASS. Survey results were compared using Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

The HM team's rate of use of I-PASS handoffs increased from 23% to 72%, an improvement of 68%. By the end of the quality improvement project, I-PASS use had increased to 90%. No significant differences were detected in the reported duration of handoffs after I-PASS implementation (on average <5 min per patient, p=0.205). Provider perceptions of handoff quality, efficiency, communication errors and the I-PASS tool's effectiveness were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

We used a quality improvement methodology to encourage the HM team's adoption of a validated handoff tool. Adherence to the standardised handoff tool significantly improved workflows and facilitated communication between the day and night shift teams.

Implementation of a standardised accept note to improve communication during inter-hospital transfer: a prospective cohort study

IMPORTANCE

The transfer of patients between hospitals (interhospital transfer, IHT), exposes patients to communication errors and gaps in information exchange.

OBJECTIVE

To design and implement a standardised accept note to improve communication during medical service transfers, and evaluate its impact on patient outcomes.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional cohort study.

SETTING

A 792-bed tertiary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

All patient transfers from any acute care hospital to the general medicine, cardiology, oncology and intensive care unit (ICU) services between August 2020 and June 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

A standardised accept note template was developed over a 9-month period with key stakeholder input and embedded in the electronic health record, completed by nurses within the hospital's Access Centre.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcome was clinician-reported medical errors collected via surveys of admitting clinicians within 72 hours after IHT patient admission. Secondary outcomes included clinician-reported failures in communication; presence and 'timeliness' of accept note documentation; patient length of stay (LOS) after transfer; rapid response or ICU transfer within 24 hours and in-hospital mortality. All outcomes were analysed postintervention versus preintervention, adjusting for patient demographics, diagnosis, comorbidity, illness severity, admitting service, time of year, hospital COVID census and census of admitting service and admitting team on date of admission.

RESULTS

Of the 1004 and 654 IHT patients during preintervention and postintervention periods, surveys were collected on 735 (73.2%) and 462 (70.6%), respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar among patients in each time period and between survey responders and non-responders. Adjusted analyses demonstrated a 27% reduction in clinician-reported medical error rates postimplementation versus preimplementation (11.5 vs 15.8, adjusted OR (aOR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.99). Secondary outcomes demonstrated lower adjusted odds of clinician-reported failures in communication (aOR 0.88; 0.78 to 0.98) and rapid response/ICU transfer (aOR 0.57; 0.34 to 0.97), and improved presence (aOR 2.30; 1.75 to 3.02) and timeliness (-21.4 hours vs -8.7 hours, p<0.001) of accept note documentation. There were no significant differences in LOS or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among 1658 medical patient transfers, implementing a standardised accept note was associated with improved presence and timeliness of accept note documentation, clinician-reported medical errors, failures in communication and clinical decline following transfer, suggesting that improving communication during IHT can improve patient outcomes.

Association of Time of Day with Delays in Antimicrobial Initiation among Ward Patients with Hospital-Onset Sepsis

Rationale: Although the mainstay of sepsis treatment is timely initiation of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, treatment delays are common, especially among patients who develop hospital-onset sepsis. The time of day has been associated with suboptimal clinical care in several contexts, but its association with treatment initiation among patients with hospital-onset sepsis is unknown. Objectives: Assess the association of time of day with antimicrobial initiation among ward patients with hospital-onset sepsis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included ward patients who developed hospital-onset sepsis while admitted to five acute care hospitals in a single health system from July 2017 through December 2019. Hospital-onset sepsis was defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event criteria. We estimated the association between the hour of day and antimicrobial initiation among patients with hospital-onset sepsis using a discrete-time time-to-event model, accounting for time elapsed from sepsis onset. In a secondary analysis, we fit a quantile regression model to estimate the association between the hour of day of sepsis onset and time to antimicrobial initiation. Results: Among 1,672 patients with hospital-onset sepsis, the probability of antimicrobial initiation at any given hour varied nearly fivefold throughout the day, ranging from 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-4.1%) at 7 a.m. to 13.9% (95% CI, 11.3-16.5%) at 6 p.m., with nadirs at 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. and progressive decline throughout the night shift (13.4% [95% CI, 10.7-16.0%] at 9 p.m. to 3.2% [95% CI, 2.0-4.0] at 6 a.m.). The standardized predicted median time to antimicrobial initiation was 3.2 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 2.5-3.8 h) for sepsis onset during the day shift (7 a.m.-7 p.m.) and 12.9 hours (IQR, 10.9-14.9 h) during the night shift (7 p.m.-7 a.m.). Conclusions: The probability of antimicrobial initiation among patients with new hospital-onset sepsis declined at shift changes and overnight. Time to antimicrobial initiation for patients with sepsis onset overnight was four times longer than for patients with onset during the day. These findings indicate that time of day is associated with important care processes for ward patients with hospital-onset sepsis. Future work should validate these findings in other settings and elucidate underlying mechanisms to inform quality-enhancing interventions.

[Structured patient handover in high-risk areas : Evidence and recommendations for the practical implementation]

The perioperative setting is a high-risk environment which is particularly susceptible to communication deficits and errors. The situation, background, assessment, recommendation (SBAR) approach provides an intuitive guideline for team communication, which is associated with an improved quality of the handover. The German Society for Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) has updated its recommendations in March 2022 and continues to endorse the use of the SBAR template. The impact of tools used for structured communication during patient handover are often studied in the context of a larger bundle of measures. The SBAR template is one option for establishing structured communication in clinical practice. Successful implementation is supported by clearly defined standard workflows to promote consistent use. This standardization identifies common communication barriers and assists in resolving them in a high-risk environment. A common understanding of the inherent values, and a shared interest in learning, applying, and training these techniques are paramount in establishing a culture of patient safety. This can only be reached through excellent interprofessional teamwork and supportive leadership.

Evaluating the Implementation of a Medical Student's Handoff Curriculum During the Surgery Clerkship

INTRODUCTION

Early introduction to essential communication skills is important. We sought to determine if a handoff curriculum (HC) would improve confidence, decrease anxiety, and increase participation in clinical handoffs during the surgical clerkship.

METHODS

A multi-center prospective cohort study was performed at two medical schools. Training in the intervention group (HC) consisted of a didactic lecture, video review, and practice session. Students completed a pre-clerkship knowledge test and confidence/anxiety/handoff experience questionnaire pre- and post-clerkship.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in pre-clerkship handoff experiences between institutions except having previously witnessed a verbal handoff (School A 96.4% versus School B 76.2%, P = 0.01). While there were no significant differences in post-clerkship confidence or anxiety, HC students were significantly more involved with written sign-outs (52.9% versus 18.2%, P = 0.02) and verbal handoffs (29.4% versus 4.6%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Medical students exposed to handoff training shared similar confidence and anxiety scores compared to those that were not, however, they were more involved in handoff experiences during their surgical clerkship. Early introduction to handoff skills may encourage greater participation during subsequent clinical experiences.

Nurses' perceptions of the ISBAR handover protocol and its relationship to the quality of handover: A case study of bilingual nurses

Introduction

Poor communication at handover may cause harm to the patient. Despite numerous studies promoting ISBAR as a communication tool for structured handover, nurses have varied levels of understanding of the ISBAR tool; this may lead to different perceptions. This paper aims to explore the structural relationships between factors relating to handover communication among nurses.

Method

A path analysis was conducted to analyse how 206 bilingual nurses' knowledge of the ISBAR affects the perceived quality of handover, using a validated Nursing Handover Perception Questionnaire.

Results

Nurses' knowledge of the ISBAR was not a statistically significant factor affecting the perceived quality of handover. Rather, nurses' understanding of patients' care plans and receiving updated information about patients determine the perceived quality of handover.

Discussion

Nurses' compliance with the ISBAR tool should be considered in order to further identify and develop effective communication skills. Nurses' understanding of patients' care plans and receiving updated patient information significantly corresponded to the perceived quality of handover.

Measuring Potential Visual Exposure of Physicians During Shift-End Handoffs and Its Impact on Interruptions, Privacy, and Collaboration

BACKGROUND

Frequent interruptions, inadequate privacy, and lack of collaboration are barriers to safe and efficient end-of-shift handoffs between emergency physicians. Varying levels of visibility to and from physicians can impact these outcomes. This study quantifies potential visual exposure of physicians in workstations with varying enclosure levels using isovist connectivity (IC) as a measure. Further, this study examines the association of IC with number of interruptions/hour, perceived collaboration, and privacy during handoffs.

METHODS

In-person observations were conducted during 60 handoffs to capture interruptions. Surveys were administered to the incoming and outgoing physicians to garner their perceptions of the extent of interruptions, collaboration, and privacy. Spatial analysis was conducted using DepthmapX.

RESULTS

Findings demonstrate significant differences in IC scores based on (a) physicians location within the workstation during; (b) handoff approach (individual or collaborative); (c) position during handoff (sitting or standing). Documented interruptions were highest in the high IC locations and lowest in the medium and low IC locations. Physicians in low IC locations perceived to have sufficient privacy to conduct handoffs.

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSION

It should be noted that the three pods, each housing a physician workstation with different enclosure levels, varied in number of patient rooms, patient acuity, overall size, and the location of workstations. While contextual variables were considered to the extent possible, several other factors could have resulted in differences in number of interruptions and collaboration levels. This study provides design recommendations for handoff locations and a method to test emergency physician workstation designs prior to construction.

Implementation of the 'PicNic' handover huddle: A quality improvement project to improve the transition of infants between paediatric and neonatal intensive care units

AIMS

Thorough handover and effective communication are crucial to the transfer of clinical information between different intensive care units. Following a sentinel patient safety event, an improvement project was initiated to reduce patient safety risks associated with the transfer of complex patients between the neonatal and paediatric intensive care.

METHODS

A handover tool was implemented over a 4-month period, guiding handover through means of a handover huddle. The tool ensured a full ISBAR (Introduction, Situation, Background, Assessment, Response) handover, with a specified attendance register. It acknowledged specific safety points inclusive of outstanding investigations, procedural history and medication transcription. Post implementation, huddle checklist sheets were audited for compliance and a staff satisfaction survey was conducted.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine handovers took place during this trial period, of which 69% were captured in the huddle process. Senior medical and nursing staff attendance was greater than 95% throughout the process, and 100% of huddles attended to a full ISBAR handover. Sixty staff satisfaction survey responses were received, 90% of which identified the process to improve the safety of patient handover. Responses also identified safety issues such as discontinuity of medication transcription between the units, and inappropriate patient transfers occurring outside of working hours. Qualitative feedback highlighted how the tool improved interdepartmental educational and collaboration opportunities.

CONCLUSIONS

The 'PicNic' huddle effectively facilitated a standardised handover between paediatric and neonatal intensive care. It also recognised the importance of interdepartmental collaboration and education surrounding culturally different clinical practices. Further improvement cycles continue to progress the tool and initiate a digital format for ongoing use.

Development and pilot implementation of a patient-oriented discharge summary for critically Ill patients

BACKGROUND

Patients leaving the intensive care unit (ICU) often experience gaps in care due to deficiencies in discharge communication, leaving them vulnerable to increased stress, adverse events, readmission to ICU, and death. To facilitate discharge communication, written summaries have been implemented to provide patients and their families with information on medications, activity and diet restrictions, follow-up appointments, symptoms to expect, and who to call if there are questions. While written discharge summaries for patients and their families are utilized frequently in surgical, rehabilitation, and pediatric settings, few have been utilized in ICU settings.

AIM

To develop an ICU specific patient-oriented discharge summary tool (PODS-ICU), and pilot test the tool to determine acceptability and feasibility.

METHODS

Patient-partners (i.e., individuals with lived experience as an ICU patient or family member of an ICU patient), ICU clinicians (i.e., physicians, nurses), and researchers met to discuss ICU patients' specific informational needs and design the PODS-ICU through several cycles of discussion and iterative revisions. Research team nurses piloted the PODS-ICU with patient and family participants in two ICUs in Calgary, Canada. Follow-up surveys on the PODS-ICU and its impact on discharge were administered to patients, family participants, and ICU nurses.

RESULTS

Most participants felt that their discharge from the ICU was good or better (n = 13; 87.0%), and some (n = 9; 60.0%) participants reported a good understanding of why the patient was in ICU. Most participants (n = 12; 80.0%) reported that they understood ICU events and impacts on the patient's health. While many patients and family participants indicated the PODS-ICU was informative and useful, ICU nurses reported that the PODS-ICU was "not reasonable" in their daily clinical workflow due to "time constraint".

CONCLUSION

The PODS-ICU tool provides patients and their families with essential information as they discharge from the ICU. This tool has the potential to engage and empower patients and their families in ensuring continuity of care beyond ICU discharge. However, the PODS-ICU requires pairing with earlier discharge practices and integration with electronic clinical information systems to fit better into the clinical workflow for ICU nurses. Further refinement and testing of the PODS-ICU tool in diverse critical care settings is needed to better assess its feasibility and its effects on patient health outcomes.

The Impact of Electronic Handoff Tool on Sign-Out Practices in an Internal Medicine Residency Program

High-quality and efficient sign-outs are essential to ensure patient safety. To evaluate the impact of a new handoff tool by objective measures of handoff quality and residents' subjective experiences. Internal medicine residents working on a medical ward service completed a handoff clinical evaluation exercise (CEX) questionnaire and an anonymous survey on handoff quality and experiences prior to implementing a new handoff tool and at 2 and 6 weeks after implementation. CEX scores significantly improved from 5.3 ± 1.1 to 6.9 ± 0.7 in 6 weeks ( P < 0.05). Residents reported that they were contacted less frequently after work, information needed by the receiving resident was more often found in the sign-out, and that tasks signed out to the oncoming team were more often executed. Before implementing the new handoff tool, 87% of residents reported that they were contacted after work hours 1-2 times per week with questions, while 75% of participants reported that they were almost never contacted after work hours after the new tool was implemented. A standardized handoff tool that utilizes smart phrases to provide residents with templates for sign-out significantly improved the quality and experience of sign-out in a short time period.

Improving the handover process in a psychiatry liaison setting

Efficient handover of patient care is integral to clinical safety. Barriers in communication can lead to adverse outcomes. The Integrated Liaison Assessment Team (ILAT) has a daily handover meeting which presents several challenges to the multidisciplinary liaison team (MDT including high patient turnover, differing staff shift-work patterns, presence of visitors/students and lack of a unified approach to structured discussion at times. Areas identified for improvement included optimising efficiency, structure and handover documentation. Lack of teaching and learning opportunities were also identified. The primary aim was to reduce handover time to 30 min. The secondary aims were to improve communication by introducing the Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) tool, improve team satisfaction and introduce a teaching programme in the time saved. The Model for Improvement methodology was used with MDT focus groups and questionnaires to explore change ideas. This informed our 'Plan, Do, Study, Act' cycles to design a structured handover. Daily measures looked at handover length and individual team member satisfaction. Weekly measures included semiqualitative questionnaires highlighting areas for improvement. Feedback was gathered from emails and MDT discussions. A structured handover format incorporating SBAR, key task allocation and a shift handover lead was introduced. A regular MDT teaching programme was initiated. Over 4 weeks, 'Good' handover ratings increased from 22% to 65%; 'Poor' ratings decreased from 25% to 8%. Mean handover time decreased from 47 min to 31.25 min; a decrease of 33.5%. Overall, the team viewed SBAR positively as an efficiency-promoting tool. Structured handover has promoted staff competencies, team morale and information sharing practices among ILAT. MDT teaching improved team communication and confidence. Sustaining motivation to keep up interventions and documentation of handover were identified as key areas for sustained improvement.

Disconnection in Information Exchange During Pediatric Trauma Transfers: A Qualitative Study

Pediatric patients experiencing an emergency department (ED) visit for a traumatic injury often transfer from the referring ED to a pediatric trauma center. This qualitative study sought to evaluate the experience of information exchange during pediatric trauma visits to referring EDs from the perspectives of parents and referring and accepting clinicians through semi-structured interviews. Twenty-five interviews were conducted (10 parents and 15 clinicians) and analyzed through qualitative thematic analysis. A 4-person team collaboratively identified codes, wrote memos, developed major themes, and discussed theoretical concepts. Three interdependent themes emerged: (1) Parents’ and clinicians’ distinct experiences result in a disconnect of information exchange needs; (2) systems factors inhibit effective information exchange and amplify the disconnect; and (3) situational context disrupts the flow of information contributing to the disconnect. Individual-, situational-, and systems-level factors contribute to disconnects in the information exchanged between parents and clinicians. Understanding how these factors’ influence information disconnect may offer avenues for improving patient–clinician communication in trauma transfers.

Interchangeability in Military Interprofessional Health Care Teams: Lessons Into Collective Self-healing and the Benefits Thereof

INTRODUCTION

Interchangeability-i.e., the capacity to change places with another-is necessary for military interprofessional health care teams (MIHTs) to provide around-the-clock patient care. However, while interchangeability is clearly a necessity for modern health care delivery, it raises uncomfortable questions for civilian health care teams where it is usually labeled as unsafe. This perception surfaces because interchangeability runs counter to some of health care's cultural beliefs including those around patient ownership and professional scopes of practice. It is, therefore, not surprising that little is known about whether and how some level of interchangeability can be harnessed to improve the productivity of health care teams overall. In this article, we explore the notion of interchangeability in the particular context of MIHTs given that these health care teams are familiar with it. This exploration will offer insights into how interchangeability could maximize civilian health care teams' capacity to adapt.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of interview data as an analytic expansion: "the kind of study in which the researcher makes further use of a primary data set in order to ask new or emerging questions that derive from having conducted the original analysis but were not envisioned within the original scope of the primary study aims". Within our secondary analysis approach, we used thematic analysis as our analytical tool to describe (1) what interchangeability looks like in MIHT teams, (2) how it is fostered in MIHTs, and (3) how it is enacted in MIHTs.

RESULTS

Interchangeability was realized in MIHTs when individual team members adapted to take on roles and/or tasks that were not clearly niched in their specific areas of expertise but instead drew on the broad foundation of their clinical skill set. Cross-training and distributed leadership were ways in which MIHT members described how interchangeability was fostered. Furthermore, five features of working within MIHT teams were identified as key conditions to enact interchangeability: knowing your team members; being able to work with what/who you have; actively seeking others' expertise; situating your role within the broader picture of the mission; and maintaining a learning/teaching mindset.

CONCLUSIONS

Interchangeability can be understood through the theoretical lens of Swarm Intelligence and more specifically, the principle of collective self-healing-which is the ability of collectives to continue to successfully perform despite disruption, challenges, or the loss of a team member. Our findings highlight how MIHTs have adopted interchangeability in a wide array of contexts to realize collective self-healing. Despite the discomfort it provokes, we suggest that interchangeability could be a powerful asset to civilian health care teams.

Improving Communication for Admissions From Urgent Care to Inpatient Using a Structured Handoff

BACKGROUND

Previous studies reveal that ineffective communication contributes to patient-safety events. Structured handoffs improve communication during shift change and transfers from outpatient clinics to emergency departments. We aimed to improve the perceived quality of admission handoffs from a baseline of 22.2% to 50% by the end of the study period through use of a standardized template between urgent care (UC) and inpatient providers.

METHODS

We used quality improvement methodology to identify key themes (clarity in illness severity, organization, completeness, and pace) that contribute to decreased quality communication. A survey to evaluate the perception of communication and key themes between the groups was administered. During the 15-month quality improvement study at a tertiary pediatric institution, we implemented a handoff tool with visual aids. Givers of information received formal training. Participants received iterative performance feedback. A control chart was used to monitor fidelity to the handoff tool. We used statistical analyses to compare changes in perceived communication between provider types before and after implementation of the handoff tool.

RESULTS

Both UC and inpatient providers had an increased rate of positive perceptions in the overall quality of communication after 12 months of using the admission handoff tool (22% vs 67.3%; P = .01). Complete fidelity to the admission handoff tool increased over time. There was no change in mean duration of handoff (4 minutes) after implementing the structured handoff.

CONCLUSIONS

A structured handoff during admission of pediatric patients from an off-site UC to inpatient setting improved the perception of the quality of admission handoff communication.

Improving the neonatal team handoff process in a level IV NICU: reducing interruptions and handoff duration

Background

Neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients are at increased risk for handoff communication failures due to complexity and prolonged length of stay. We report a quality initiative aimed at reducing avoidable interruptions during neonatal handoffs while monitoring handoff duration and provider satisfaction.

Methods

Observational time series between August 2015 and March 2018 in an academic level IV NICU. NICU I-PASS and process changes were implemented using plan–do–study–act cycle, and statistical process control charts were used in the analysis. Unmatched preintervention and postintervention satisfaction surveys were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests.

Results

There was special cause variation in the mean number of avoidable interruptions per handoff from 4 to 0.3 (92% reduction). The mean duration of handoff was reduced ~1 min/patient. Provider satisfaction with the quality of handoffs also improved from a mean of 3.36 to 3.75 on a 1–5 Likert scale (p=0.049).

Conclusions

Standardisation of NICU handoff with NICU I-PASS and process changes led to the sustained reduction in avoidable interruptions with the added benefit of reduced handoff length and improved provider satisfaction.

The Standardisation of handoffs in a large academic paediatric emergency department using I-PASS

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for standardised handoffs in the emergency department (ED), few EDs have an established tool. Our aim was to improve the quality of handoffs in the ED by establishing compliance with the I-PASS handoff tool.

METHODS

This is a quality improvement (QI) initiative to standardise handoffs in a large academic paediatric ED. Following review of the literature and focus groups with key stakeholders, I-PASS was selected and modified to fit departmental needs. Implementation throughPlan-Do-Study-Act cycles included the development of educational materials, reminders and real-time feedback. Required use of I-PASS during designated team sign-out began in June 2016. Compliance with the handoff tool and handoff deficiencies was measured through observations by faculty trained in I-PASS. As a balancing measure, time to complete handoff was monitored and compared with preintervention data.

RESULTS

Compliance with I-PASS reached 80% within 6 months, 100% within 7 months and sustained at 100% during the remainder of the study period. The average percent of omissions of crucial information per handoff declined to 8.3%, which was a 53% decrease. Average percentage of tangential information and miscommunications per handoff did not show a decline. The average handoff took 20 min, which did not differ from the preintervention time. Survey results demonstrated a perceived improvement in patient safety through closed-loop communication, clear action lists and contingency planning and proper patient acuity identification.

CONCLUSIONS

I-PASS is applicable in the ED and can be successfully implemented through QI methodology contributing to an overall culture of safety.

Impact of intensive care unit admission during handover on mortality: propensity matched cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of intensive care unit admission during medical handover on mortality.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of data extracted from a prior study aimed at addressing the impacts of intensive care unit readmission on clinical outcomes. This retrospective, single-center, propensity-matched cohort study was conducted in a 41-bed general open-model intensive care unit. Patients were assigned to one of two cohorts according to time of intensive care unit admission: Handover Group (intensive care unit admission between 6:30 am and 7:30 am or 6:30 pm and 7:30 pm) or Control Group (intensive care unit admission between 7:31 am and 6:29 pm or 7:31 pm and 6:29 am). Patients in the Handover Group were propensity-matched to patients in the Control Group at a 1:2 ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 6,650 adult patients were admitted to the intensive care unit between June 1st 2013 and May 31st 2015. Following exclusion of non-eligible participants, 5,779 patients (389; 6.7% and 5,390; 93.3%, Handover and Control Group) were deemed eligible for propensity score matching. Of these, 1,166 were successfully matched (389; 33.4% and 777; 66.6%, Handover and Control Group). Following propensity-score matching, intensive care unit admission during handover was not associated with increased risk of intensive care unit (OR: 1.40; 95%CI: 0.92-2.11; p=0.113) or in-hospital (OR: 1.23; 95%CI: 0.85-1.75; p=0.265) mortality.

CONCLUSION

Intensive care unit admission during medical handover did not affect in-hospital mortality in this propensity-matched, single-center cohort study.

The Inter-Rater Consistency of Clinician Ratings of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Therapy Content

Effective communication between clinicians is essential for the success of mental health interventions in multidisciplinary contexts. This relies on a shared understanding of concepts, diagnoses and treatments. A major assumption of clinicians when discussing psychological treatments with each other is that both parties have a shared understanding of the theory, rationale and application of the respective technique. We aimed to determine to what extent there is inter-rater agreement between clinicians in describing the content of group therapy sessions. Pairs of clinicians, drawn from a large multidisciplinary team (13), were asked to provide ratings of the therapeutic content and emphasis of N = 154 group therapy sessions conducted during an intensive residential treatment program for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In most therapeutic content domains there was a moderate level of agreement between clinicians regarding session content (Cohen's Kappa 0.4 to 0.6), suggesting that clinicians have a broad shared understanding of therapeutic content, but that there are also frequent discordant understandings. The implications of these findings on multidisciplinary team communication, patient care and clinical handovers are discussed and directions for further research are outlined.

Rural family physician perspectives on communication with urban specialists: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Communication is a key competency for medical education and comprehensive patient care. In rural environments, communication between rural family physicians and urban specialists is an essential pathway for clinical decision making. The aim of this study was to explore rural physicians' perspectives on communication with urban specialists during consultations and referrals.

SETTING

Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study involved semistructured, one-on-one interviews with rural family physicians (n=11) with varied career stages, geographical regions, and community sizes.

RESULTS

Four themes specific to communication in rural practice were identified. The themes included: (1) understanding the contexts of rural care; (2) geographical isolation and patient transfer; and (3) respectful discourse; and (4) overcoming communication challenges in referrals and consultations.

CONCLUSIONS

Communication between rural family physicians and urban specialists is a critical task in providing care for rural patients. Rural physicians see value in conveying unique aspects of rural clinical practice during communication with urban specialists, including context and the complexities of patient transfers.

Systemic Problem Structuring in a Complex Hospital Environment using Viable System Diagnosis - Keeping the Blood Flowing

This article presents the application of the systemic problem structuring approach Viable System Diagnosis (VSD) within the Department of Orthopedic Surgery in a large hospital in Norway. It explains why systemic thinking is relevant to this uniquely complex form of human organization. The department was coping with systemic dysfunction and VSD was chosen because previous applications demonstrated VSD excels at diagnosis of what is causing dysfunction. VSD was employed through a participatory framework that included in the process, among other stakeholders, medics, technologists, managers, administrators and, as far as possible given the sensitive nature of patient information, the patient. VSD guided thinking about what the organization is set up to do and the existing organizational arrangements to achieve that. The outcome was an agenda for debate that guided stakeholder discussions toward ways and means of improving organizational arrangements. The article briefly reviews previous applications of VSD in the hospital sector and other large complex organisations.

Impact of a blended curriculum on nursing handover quality: a quality improvement project

Context and objective

The negative consequences of inadequate nursing handovers on patient safety are widely acknowledged, both within the literature as in practice. Evidence regarding strategies to improve nursing handover is, however, lacking. This study investigates the effect of a tailored, blended curriculum on nurses’ perception of handover quality.

Methods

We used a pre-test/post-test design within four units of a Belgian general hospital. Our educational intervention consisted of an e-learning module on professional communication and a face-to-face session on the use of a structured method for handovers. All nurses completed this blended curriculum (n=87). We used the Handover Evaluation Scale (HES) to evaluate nurses’ perception of handover quality before and after the intervention. The HES was answered by 87.4% of the nurses (n=76 of 87) before and 50.6% (n=44 of 87) after the intervention. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the validity of the HES.

Results

The original factor structure did not fit with our data. We identified a new HES structure with acceptable or good fit indices. The overall internal consistency of our HES structure was considered adequate. Perception of nurses on Relevance of information showed a significant improvement (M=53.19±4.33 vs M=61.03±6.01; p=0.04). Nurses also felt that the timely provision of patient information improved significantly (M=4.50±0.34 vs M=5.16±0.40; p=0.01).

Conclusion

The applied intervention resulted in an improved awareness on the importance of Relevance of information during handovers. After our intervention, the nurses’ perception of the HES item ‘Patient information is provided in a timely manner’ also improved significantly. We are aware that the educational intervention is only the first step to achieve the long-term implementation of a culture of professional communication based on mutual support.

Assessment of Care Handoffs Among Hospitalist Physicians and 30-Day Mortality in Hospitalized Medicare Beneficiaries

IMPORTANCE

Inpatients treated by hospitalist physicians, who often work contiguous days, experience handoffs at the end of a scheduled shift block. Evidence suggests that transitions of patient care, or handoffs, among physician trainees are associated with adverse patient outcomes. However, little is known about the association between handoffs and patient outcomes among attending physicians, even though similar concerns apply.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between inpatient handoffs of hospitalist physicians and patient mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study analyzed a random sample of Medicare beneficiaries who were hospitalized with a general medical condition between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, and treated by a hospitalist. The study compared outcomes of patients with low vs high probability of physician handoff based on date of patient admission relative to the admitting hospitalist's last working day in a scheduled block, hypothesizing that otherwise similar patients admitted toward the end of a physician's shift block would be more likely to be handed off to another physician compared with patients admitted earlier in the shift block. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2018, to January 12, 2021.

EXPOSURE

High vs low probability of physician handoff.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was patient 30-day mortality rate.

RESULTS

A total of 1 074 000 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.9 [13.7] years; 57.4% female; 82.1% White) were studied. Multivariable regression models adjusted for beneficiary clinical and demographic characteristics and hospital fixed effects (a within-hospital analysis, effectively comparing patients treated at the same hospital). Among 597 288 hospitalizations, no overall difference in 30-day mortality was observed between patients admitted in the 2 days prior (days -1 and -2) to the treating hospitalist's last working day (a high handoff probability) compared with days -6 and -7 (a low handoff probability) (adjusted rate, 10.6%; 95% CI, 10.5%-10.7% vs 10.6%; 95% CI, 10.5%-10.7%; adjusted difference, 0.0%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 0.1%). However, in an exploratory analysis, among patients with high illness severity, defined as those in the top quartile of estimated mortality, 30-day mortality was higher for those with high vs low likelihood of physician handoff (adjusted mortality, 27.8%; 95% CI, 27.6%-27.9% vs 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.6%-27.1%; absolute adjusted difference, 1.0%; 95% CI, 0.5%-1.4%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this national analysis of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with a general medical condition and treated by a hospitalist physician, physician handoff was not associated with increased mortality overall.

Improving Handoff by Deliberate Cognitive Processing: Results from a Randomized Controlled Experimental Study

BACKGROUND

Although a number of successful handoff interventions have been reported, the handoff process remains vulnerable because it relies on memory. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of deliberate cognitive processing (i.e., analytical, conscious, and effortful thinking) on recall of information from a simulated handoff.

METHODS

This two-phased experiment was executed in the Netherlands in 2015. A total of 78 pediatric residents were randomly divided into an intervention group (n = 37) and a control group (n = 41). In phase 1, participants received written handoffs from 8 patients. The intervention group was asked to develop a contingency plan for each patient, deliberately processing the information. The control group received no specific instructions. In phase 2, all participants were asked to write down as much as they recalled from the handoffs. The outcome was the amount and accuracy of recalled information, calculated by scoring for idea units (single information elements) and inferences (conclusions computed by participants based on two or more idea units).

RESULTS

Participants in the intervention group recalled significantly more inferences (7.24 vs. 3.22) but fewer correct idea units (21.1% vs. 25.3%) than those in the control group. There was no difference with regard to incorrectly recalled information.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that deliberate cognitive processing leads to creation of more correct inferences, but fewer idea units. This suggests that deliberate cognitive processing results in interpretation of the information into higher level concepts, rather than remembering specific pieces of information separately. This implies better understanding of patients' problems.

A Handoffs Software Led to Fewer Errors of Omission and Better Provider Satisfaction: A Randomized Control Trial

BACKGROUND

Computer-assisted communication is shown to prevent critical omissions ("errors") in the handoff process.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to study this effect and related provider satisfaction, using a standardized software.

METHODS

Fourteen internal medicine house officers staffed 6 days and 1 cross-covering teams were randomized to either the intervention group or control, employing usual handoff, so that handoff information was exchanged only between same-group subjects (daily, for 28 days).

RESULTS

In the intervention group, fewer omissions (among those studied) occurred intravenous access (17 versus 422, P < 0.001), code status (1 versus 158, P < 0.001), diet/nothing per mouth (28 versus 477, P < 0.001), and deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis (17 versus 284, P < 0.001); duration to compose handoff was similar; and physicians perceived less workload adjusted for patient census and provider characteristics (P = 0.004) as well as better handoff quality (P < 0.001) and clarity (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was associated with fewer errors and superior provider satisfaction.

Completeness of the operating room to intensive care unit handover: a matter of time?

BACKGROUND

Handovers of post-anesthesia patients to the intensive care unit (ICU) are often unstructured and performed under time pressure. Hence, they bear a high risk of poor communication, loss of information and potential patient harm. The aim of this study was to investigate the completeness of information transfer and the quantity of information loss during post anesthesia handovers of critical care patients.

METHODS

Using a self-developed checklist, including 55 peri-operative items, patient handovers from the operation room or post anesthesia care unit to the ICU staff were observed and documented in real time. Observations were analyzed for the amount of correct and completely transferred patient data in relation to the written documentation within the anesthesia record and the patient's chart.

RESULTS

During a ten-week study period, 97 handovers were included. The mean duration of a handover was 146 seconds, interruptions occurred in 34% of all cases. While some items were transferred frequently (basic patient characteristics [72%], surgical procedure [83%], intraoperative complications [93.8%]) others were commonly missed (underlying diseases [23%], long-term medication [6%]). The completeness of information transfer is associated with the handover's duration [B coefficient (95% CI): 0.118 (0.084-0.152), p<0.001] and increases significantly in handovers exceeding a duration of 2 minutes (24% ± 11.7 vs. 40% ± 18.04, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Handover completeness is affected by time pressure, interruptions, and inappropriate surroundings, which increase the risk of information loss. To improve completeness and ensure patient safety, an adequate time span for handover, and the implementation of communication tools are required.

Evidence for validity for the Cognitive Load Inventory for Handoffs

CONTEXT

Patient handovers remain a significant patient safety challenge. Cognitive load theory (CLT) can be used to identify the cognitive mechanisms for handover errors. The ability to measure cognitive load types during handovers could drive the development of more effective curricula and protocols. No such measure currently exists.

METHODS

The authors developed the Cognitive Load Inventory for Handoffs (CLIH) using a multi-step process, including expert interviews to enhance content validity and talk-alouds to optimise response process validity. The final version contained 28 items. From January to March 2019, we administered a cross-sectional survey to 1807 residents and fellows from a large health care system in the USA. Participants completed the CLIH following a handover. Exploratory factor analysis of data from one-third of respondents identified high-performing items; confirmatory factor analysis of data from the remaining sample assessed model fit. Model fit was evaluated using the comparative fit index (CFI) (>0.90), Tucker-Lewis index (TFI) (>0.80), standardised root mean square residual (SRMR) (<0.08) and root mean square of error of approximation (RMSEA) (<0.08).

RESULTS

Participants included 693 trainees (38.4%) (231 in the exploratory study and 462 in the confirmatory study). Eleven items were removed during exploratory factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis of the 16 remaining items (five for intrinsic load, seven for extraneous load and four for germane load) supported a three-factor model and met criteria for good model fit: the CFI was 0.95, TFI was 0.93, RMSEA was 0.074 and SRMR was 0.07. The factor structure was comparable for gender and role. Intrinsic, extraneous and germane load scales had high internal consistency. With one exception, scale scores were associated, as hypothesised, with postgraduate level and clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLIH measures three types of cognitive load during patient handovers. Evidencefor validity is provided for the CLIH's content, response process, internal structure and association with other variables. This instrument can be used to determine the relative drivers of cognitive load during handovers in order to optimize handover instruction and protocols.

Using a Direct Observation Tool (TOC-CEX) to Standardize Transitions of Care by Residents at a Community Hospital

Background: High-quality transitions of care are crucial for patient safety in hospitals, yet few undergraduate curricula include transition-of-care training. In 2012, the Wayne State University Office of Graduate Medical Education (WSUGME) required its residency programs to use the SAIF-IR mnemonic (summary, active issues, if-then contingency planning, follow-up activities, interactive questioning, readback) to ensure accurate and uniform handoffs. Subsequent program evaluations indicated that resident awareness and adoption of the mnemonic at our primary clinical site, Ascension Providence Rochester Hospital (APRH), could be improved. According to our institution's 2016 Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER), 88% of residents reported following a standardized transition of care handoff, and 53% reported that faculty rarely supervised their handoffs. A 2016 WSUGME internal survey also revealed low rates of awareness (7% to 10%) of the mandated mnemonic. WSUGME then created a direct observation tool, the Transitions of Care-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (TOC-CEX), for faculty to monitor resident skill in using the mnemonic and thus standardize transitions of care as a practice habit at APRH. Methods: Since 2014, WSUGME had relied on 2 methods for training residents in the required handoff mnemonic: (1) introduction to the SAIF-IR mnemonic during the WSUGME orientation for all interns and (2) simulations during an objective simulated handoff evaluation activity for all postgraduate year (PGY) 1s and PGY 2s. In 2017, WSUGME innovated a direct observation tool, the TOC-CEX, for adoption by faculty at APRH to assess resident knowledge of and monitor their skill in using the SAIF-IR mnemonic in 3 primary care programs. The total number of possible participants was 138, and the actual number of individuals in the sample was 95. A majority (86%) of the observations during the study period were of PGY 1 residents, and thus the analysis reflects the ratings of 99% of all interns but only 69% of all possible residents. Results: WSUGME found that faculty use of a direct observation instrument in the clinical learning environment during 2017-2019 increased awareness and adoption of the SAIF-IR mnemonic among residents. Using a z-test of equal proportions on resident responses on an internal WSUGME survey, we found a significant rise in the percentage reporting yes to the question "Does your program have a mechanism for monitoring handoffs?" (χ2 [3]=23.6, P<0.0001) and in the percentage identifying SAIF-IR in response to the question "Does your program endorse a specific mnemonic for organizing the contents of a verbal handoff?" (χ2 [3]=45.0, P<0.0001). The increase from 2016 to 2017 is the result of the implementation of the TOC-CEX in the interim (question 1: χ2 [1]=12.4, P<0.0005; question 2: χ2 [1]=10.1, P<0.0025). Conclusion: Our research found that use of the TOC-CEX to monitor resident handoffs resulted in improved awareness and adoption of the SAIF-IR mnemonic in the clinical learning environment. Program leadership reported that the practice was both feasible and well accepted by residents, faculty, and the APRH chief medical officer as the TOC-CEX became a customary component of APRH organizational culture and was perceived as central to quality patient care.

Identifying facilitators and barriers to develop implementation strategy for an ED to Ward handover tool using behaviour change theory (EDWHAT)

Background

Effective clinical handover is fundamental to clinical practice and recognised as a global quality and safety priority. Problems with clinical handover from the emergency department (ED) to inpatient ward across four hospitals in the Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District (ISLHD) were identified in a number of reportable clinical incidents. To address this, an ED to inpatient ward electronic clinical handover tool was developed and implemented. However, site uptake of the tool varied from 45 to 90%.

Aim

To determine the facilitators and barriers of the ED to Ward Handover Tool (EDWHAT) implementation and design strategy to improve local compliance and inform wider implementation.

Methods

An exploratory convergent mixed-method approach was used. Data were collected via a 13-item electronic survey informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) distributed to eligible nurses across the health district. Descriptive statistics for quantitative data and thematic analysis for qualitative data were conducted. The data were then integrated and mapped to the TDF and the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify specific behaviour change techniques to support implementation.

Results

There were 300 respondents. The majority of nurses knew where to locate the tool (91.26%), but 45.79% felt that it was not adequate to ensure safe handover. The most frequently reported factors that hindered nurses from using the tool were inability to access a phone near a computer (44.32%) (environmental domain), being told to transfer the patient before being able to complete the form (39.93%) (reinforcement) and the other nurse receiving (or giving) the handover not using the form (38.83%) (social influence). An implementation checklist to identify barriers and solutions to future uptake was developed.

Conclusion

To improve uptake, the functionality, content, and flow of the handover tool must be revised, alongside environmental restructuring. Nurses would benefit from an awareness of each speciality’s needs to develop a shared mental model and monitoring, and enforcement of tool use should become part of a routine audit.

Quality analysis of operative reports and referral data for appendiceal neoplasms with peritoneal dissemination

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis from appendiceal neoplasms is a rare disease usually found unexpectedly and is associated with deficits in quality reporting of findings.

METHODS

Retrospective review of our appendiceal peritoneal metastases carcinomatosis database evaluating quality of index operative and pathology reports. Operative report quality was graded by 2 standards; general quality, based on Royal College of Surgeons quality metrics and peritoneal metastases assessment. Pathology report quality was assessed by the accuracy of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventy-five index operative reports and 490 outside pathology reports were reviewed. General quality of the index operative reports was excellent, with nearly 80% of reports encompassing all the Royal College of Surgeons quality metrics. Peritoneal metastases assessment was poor. Forty-four percent of the reports performed no peritoneal evaluation, while 48.3% only involved partial peritoneal evaluation. Only 7.7% of the reports performed a complete evaluation. Of the pathology reports, 48.4% had discrepancies with final pathologic findings. Low-grade disease and high-grade disease were misdiagnosed 36.06% and 62.7% of the time, respectively. Discordant treatment occurred in 15.3% and 30.0% of cases for misdiagnosed low-grade and high-grade disease, respectively. Incomplete cytoreduction was attempted in nearly a third of referral cases, which was associated with a significantly increased risk for ultimate incomplete cytoreduction with an odds ratio of 4.72.

CONCLUSION

This review finds that referral operative reports' descriptions of the technical aspects of a procedure is usually complete. However, oncologic parameters and descriptions of peritoneal metastases are frequently incomplete. Further, pathology reports from outside institutions can lead to inappropriate clinical management decisions. We propose a simplified algorithm to assist nonperitoneal surface malignancy surgeons.