Systematic Review of Intraoperative Anesthesia Handoffs and Handoff Tools

Pilot study to develop a pre-operative "Cardiothoracic Clinical Handover Tool" and its effect on handover quality

BACKGROUND

Clinical handover is an essential step in the surgical patient's hospital journey, but one that is not without risk. Within cardiothoracic surgery, endeavours to protocolise post-operative handover from cardiac theatre to cardiac intensive care units have resulted in enhanced patient safety, but little to no effort has focused on the pre-operative setting and the dissemination of information throughout the surgical team.

METHODS

We designed a pre-post study examining the quality of pre-operative cardiothoracic patient handovers before and after the introduction of an intra-departmentally designed "Cardiothoracic Clinical Handover Tool" based on the Royal College of Surgeons of England's guidelines for "Safe Handover".

RESULTS

Forty clinical handovers were assessed in each arm of the study. Handover quality improved from a score of 63.75% to 88.57% (p = < 0.001). This prolonged handover duration from a mean of 72.1 to 102.4 seconds per case (p = 0.003). Interruptions occurred in 27.5% of pre- and 25% of post-intervention handovers. Interruptions resulted in increased handover duration in both pre- and post-intervention groups (114.6 vs 77.7 seconds, p = 0.012) and poorer quality handovers in the pre-intervention group (51.28% vs 68.42%, p = 0.03) but failed to impact handover quality in the post-intervention group (88.57% vs 88.57%, p = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical handover tools have the potential to enhance the quality of pre-operative handover and protect against poor handover practices such as interruptions, safe-guarding patient welfare. We provide the first cardiothoracic specific pre-operative handover tool based on the RCSE guidelines.

A Quality Improvement Initiative to Reduce Adverse Effects of Transitions of Anesthesia Care on Postoperative Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

An intraoperative transfer of care from one anesthesia provider to another, or handover, may result in information loss and contribute to adverse patient outcomes. In 2019 the authors undertook a quality improvement effort to increase the use of a structured intraoperative handover tool incorporated in the electronic medical record. The authors hypothesized that intraoperative handovers of anesthesia care would be associated with adverse patient outcomes, and that increased use of a structured tool would attenuate this effect.

METHODS

This study included adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery of at least 1 h duration performed during the period 2016 to 2021. Cases with a handover were identified if either there was a change of attending anesthesiologist or change of nurse anesthetist or resident for more than 35 min. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a composite of postoperative mortality and major postoperative morbidity. The effect of the intervention was analyzed by examining the quarterly change in odds ratio for the primary outcome for cases with and without a handover.

RESULTS

A total of 121,077 cases, 40.4% of which had a handover, were included. After weighting, the composite outcome was statistically associated with handovers (3,517 of 48,986 [7.2%] in handover cases vs. 4,470 of 72,091 [6.2%] in nonhandover cases; odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12). Time series analysis showed a marked increase in usage of the structured tool after the initial intervention. The odds ratio for the composite outcome showed a significant decrease over time after the initial intervention (t = -3.97; P < 0.001), with the slope of the odds ratio versus time curve decreasing from 0.002 (95% CI, 0.001 to 0.004; P = 0.018) to -0.011 (95% CI, -0.01 to -0.018; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative handovers are significantly associated with adverse outcomes even after controlling for multiple confounding variables. Use of a structured handover tool during anesthesia care may attenuate the adverse effect.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

A Qualitative Study of the Work Systems and Culture Around End-of-Day Intraoperative Anesthesia Handoffs in a Tertiary Care Center

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative handoffs have been implicated as a contributing factor in many perioperative adverse events. Despite conflicting data around their impact on perioperative outcomes, they remain a vulnerable point in the perioperative system with significant attention focused on improving them. This study aimed to understand the processes in place surrounding the point of information transfer in intraoperative handoffs.

METHODS

We used semistructured interviews with anesthesia clinicians to understand the processes and systems surrounding intraoperative handoffs. Interview data were coded deductively using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model as a framework, with subthemes developed inductively.

RESULTS

Clinicians do a significant amount of work before and after the point of information transfer to ensure a smooth handoff and safe patient care. Despite not having standardization of handoffs, most clinicians have a typical handoff organization and largely agree on content that should be included. However, there is variability based on clinician and patient characteristics, including clinician discipline and patient acuity. These handoffs are additionally impacted by the overall culture in the operating room, including the teamwork and hierarchies present among the surgical and anesthesia teams. Finally, the broader operating room logistics, including scheduling practices for surgical cases and anesthesia teams, impact the quality of intraoperative handoffs and the ability of clinicians to prepare for these handoffs.

CONCLUSIONS

Handoffs involve processes beyond the point of information transfer and are embedded in the systems and culture of the operating rooms. These considerations are important when seeking to improve the quality of intraoperative handoffs.

Handoffs and the challenges to implementing teamwork training in the perioperative environment

Perioperative handoffs are high-risk events for miscommunications and poor care coordination, which cause patient harm. Extensive research and several interventions have sought to overcome the challenges to perioperative handoff quality and safety, but few efforts have focused on teamwork training. Evidence shows that team training decreases surgical morbidity and mortality, and there remains a significant opportunity to implement teamwork training in the perioperative environment. Current perioperative handoff interventions face significant difficulty with adherence which raises concerns about the sustainability of their impact. In this perspective article, we explain why teamwork is critical to safe and reliable perioperative handoffs and discuss implementation challenges to the five core components of teamwork training programs in the perioperative environment. We outline evidence-based best practices imperative for training success and acknowledge the obstacles to implementing those best practices. Explicitly identifying and discussing these obstacles is critical to designing and implementing teamwork training programs fit for the perioperative environment. Teamwork training will equip providers with the foundational teamwork competencies needed to effectively participate in handoffs and utilize handoff interventions. This will improve team effectiveness, adherence to current perioperative handoff interventions, and ultimately, patient safety.

Improving Handoffs in the Perioperative Environment: A Conceptual Framework of Key Theories, System Factors, Methods, and Core Interventions to Ensure Success

BACKGROUND

Patient handoffs involve the transition of information and responsibility for care from one health care provider to another. They occur frequently during a patient's perioperative care continuum, potentially introducing communication errors that could result in harmful, even fatal consequences. The perioperative environment poses distinct challenges to team communication and patient safety, which in turn leaves the surgical patient uniquely vulnerable to adverse events.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The best way to achieve safe, coordinated handoffs throughout the perioperative continuum has yet to be established. However, a variety of theoretical principles, methods, and interventions have been used successfully in operative and nonoperative contexts among multiple disciplines. Informed by a literature review, the authors describe a conceptual framework for the development, implementation, and sustainment of a multimodal perioperative handoff improvement bundle. The conceptual framework presented here begins with overarching objectives for patient-centered handoff improvement efforts. The article outlines theoretical principles that could be used to guide and inform future multimodal interventions, as well as health care system factors to consider. Further, the authors propose employing data-driven quality improvement and research methodologies to conduct, measure, achieve, and sustain long-term success. Finally, this report describes essential evidence-based interventional components to employ.

IMPLICATIONS

Future efforts to improve handoff safety in the perioperative environment will require a comprehensive evidence-based approach. The authors believe the conceptual framework presented here outlines essential components for success. It integrates proven theoretical frameworks, consideration of system factors, data-driven iterative methods, and synergistic patient-centered interventions.

Quality indicators for anesthesia and perioperative medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Routine monitoring of care quality is fundamental considering the high reported rates of preventable perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, no set of valid and feasible quality indicators is available as the gold standard for comprehensive routine monitoring of the overall quality of perioperative care. The purpose of this review is to describe underlying difficulties, to summarize current trends and initiatives and to outline the perspectives in support of suitable perioperative quality indicators.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most perioperative quality indicators used in the clinical setting are based on low or no evidence. Evidence-based perioperative quality indicators validated for research purposes are not always applicable in routine care. Developing a core set of perioperative quality indicators for clinical practice may benefit from matching feasible routine indicators with evidence-based indicators validated for research, from evaluating additional new indicators, and from including patients' views.

SUMMARY

A core set of valid and feasible quality indicators is essential for monitoring perioperative care quality. The development of such a set may benefit from matching evidence-based indicators with feasible standard indicators and from including patients' views.

An evidence synthesis on perioperative Handoffs: A call for balanced sociotechnical solutions

SIGNIFICANCE

Perioperative handoffs interconnect the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases underlying surgical care to maintain care continuity -yet are prone to coordination and communication failures.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize evidence on factors affecting the safety and quality of perioperative handoff conduct and process.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL was conducted to include observational, descriptive studies of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative handoffs published in English language, peer-reviewed journals. Data analysis was informed by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) framework describing the relationship between the work-system, work processes, and outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Scoring System.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included. Eighteen studies focused on postoperative handoffs, with one on preoperative, three on intraoperative and only one that looked at preoperative/postoperative handoffs combined. The SEIPS framework elucidated the complex inter-related factors (enablers and barriers) related to perioperative handoff safety. While some studies found that the use of standardized handoff tools and protocols and interdisciplinary teamwork were frequently-reported enablers, other studies identified the lack of structured handoff tools and protocols, poor teamwork and communication, and improper use of documentation tools were top-cited barriers affecting handoff quality. Suggestions to ensure handoff safety and quality included implementing structured handoff checklists and protocols and building interprofessional teamwork competencies for effective communication.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our review highlights an urgency to develop more holistic sociotechnical solutions that can create and sustain a balance between technical innovations in tools and technologies and the non-technical interventions/training needed to improve interpersonal relations and teamwork competencies - taken together, can improve the quality and safety of perioperative handoff practice.

Does standardisation improve post-operative anaesthesia handoffs? Meta-analyses on provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes

Anaesthesia handoffs are associated with negative outcomes (e.g. inappropriate treatments, post-operative complications, and in-hospital mortality). To minimise these adverse outcomes, federal bodies (e.g. Joint Commission) have mandated handoff standardisation. Due to the proliferation of handoff interventions and research, there is a need to meta-analyze anaesthesia handoffs. Therefore, we performed meta-analyses on the provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes related to post-operative anaesthesia handoff protocols. We meta-analysed 41 articles with post-operative anaesthesia handoffs that implemented a standardised handoff protocol. Compared to no standardisation, a standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoff changed provider outcomes with an OR of 4.03 (95% CI 3.20-5.08), patient outcomes with an OR of 1.49 (95% CI 1.32-1.69), organisational outcomes with an OR of 4.25 (95% CI 2.51-7.19), handoff outcomes with an OR of 8.52 (95% CI 7.05-10.31). Our meta-analyses demonstrate that standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoffs altered patient, provider, organisational, and handoff outcomes. Practitioner Summary: We conducted meta-analyses to assess the effects of post-operative anaesthesia handoff standardisation on provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes. Our findings suggest that standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoffs changed all listed outcomes in a positive direction. We discuss the implications of these findings as well as notable limitations in this literature base.

Human Factors and Ergonomics in Healthcare: Industry Demands and a Path Forward

This article reviews three industry demands that will impact the future of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Healthcare settings. These demands include the growing population of older adults, the increasing use of telemedicine, and a focus on patient-centered care. Following, we discuss a path forward through improved medical teams, error management, and safety testing of medical devices and tools. Future challenges are discussed.