A multicenter intervention to improve ambulatory care handoffs at the end of residency

Year-End Clinic Handoffs: A National Survey of Academic Internal Medicine Programs

BACKGROUND

While there has been increasing emphasis and innovation nationwide in training residents in inpatient handoffs, very little is known about the practice and preparation for year-end clinic handoffs of residency outpatient continuity practices. Thus, the latter remains an identified, yet nationally unaddressed, patient safety concern.

OBJECTIVES

The 2014 annual Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) survey included seven items for assessing the current year-end clinic handoff practices of internal medicine residency programs throughout the country.

DESIGN

Nationwide survey.

PARTICIPANTS

All internal medicine program directors registered with APDIM.

MAIN MEASURES

Descriptive statistics of programs and tools used to formulate a year-end handoff in the ambulatory setting, methods for evaluating the process, patient safety and quality measures incorporated within the process, and barriers to conducting year-end handoffs.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 361 APDIM member programs, 214 (59%) completed the Transitions of Care Year-End Clinic Handoffs section of the survey. Only 34% of respondent programs reported having a year-end ambulatory handoff system, and 4% reported assessing residents for competency in this area. The top three barriers to developing a year-end handoff system were insufficient overlap between graduating and incoming residents, inability to schedule patients with new residents in advance, and time constraints for residents, attendings, and support staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Most internal medicine programs do not have a year-end clinic handoff system in place. Greater attention to clinic handoffs and resident assessment of this care transition is needed.

Year-End Resident Clinic Handoffs: Narrative Review and Recommendations for Improvement

BACKGROUND

Year-end clinic handoffs in resident continuity clinics are an important patient safety issue.

METHODS

Intervention articles addressing the year-end resident clinic handoff were identified in a targeted literature search. These articles were reviewed and abstracted to summarize the current literature. On the basis of these reviews and consensus expert opinion, recommendations to improve year-end clinic handoffs were developed.

RESULTS

Of 23 identified articles, 10 intervention articles in the fields of internal medicine, internal medicine-pediatrics, psychiatry, and family medicine were ultimately included. The additional 13 nonintervention studies were used as background material. There were 12 clinic handoff recommendations for improvement: (1) focus on patients most at risk during the handoff, (2) educate residents, (3) consider balancing caseloads for the residents, (4) prepare patients for the handoff and perform patient-centered outreach, (5) standardize a written method of sign-out and require verbal communication for a subset of patients, (6) use a standardized template or technology solution for the handoff, (7) identify specific tasks that require follow-up, (8) enhance attending supervision during the handoff, (9) make patient assignments clear after the handoff, (10) have patients establish care with the new provider as soon as possible after the handoff, (11) establish care with telephone contact prior to the first visit, (12) perform safety audits to ensure that sign-out occurs, patients receive appointments, no-shows are rescheduled, and task follow-up is completed.

CONCLUSION

There is emerging evidence for interventions to improve year-end resident clinic handoffs, and the recommendations provided are a starting point to guide training programs.

Quantitative evaluation of a pediatric rheumatology transition program

BACKGROUND

Transition from pediatric to adult care can be a challenging process which leaves young people vulnerable to interruptions of care and worsening disease status. Efforts to improve transition processes and outcomes have included development of individualized transition plans, creation of transition clinics, and utilization of transition coordinators. Few interventions have assessed transition outcomes quantitatively.

METHODS

We assessed transition outcome and satisfaction of a social worker-centered transition program in a pediatric rheumatology clinic. The social worker met with patients who were 16 years or older and their families, provided transition education materials, assisted patients in developing an individualized transition plan, assisted in making appointments with an adult rheumatologist at time of transfer of care, and followed up with patients to assess transition outcomes. Patients were contacted 6-8 months after initial appointment with the adult rheumatologist to assess whether they remained in the care of the adult provider. Participants then completed a questionnaire to rate their satisfaction with the transition program.

RESULTS

210 adolescents and young adults participated in the transition program. Twenty-six similarly aged patients were eligible for transition services but did not participate in the program and were used as controls. Of the patients who participated in the program, 42% were considered to have transitioned successfully to adult care compared to 23% of controls (p-value = 0.002) of all patients. In the survey of satisfaction, 81% of participants said that they were satisfied with the transition process.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a social worker transition coordinator can significantly improve the rate of pediatric rheumatology patients who successfully transition to adult care. Furthermore, patients are largely satisfied with this process.

Systematic training in internal medicine-pediatrics end of residency handoffs: residency director attitudes and perceived barriers

BACKGROUND

It is unclear why systematic training in end-of-residency clinic handoffs is not universal.

PURPOSES

We assessed Internal Medicine-Pediatrics (Med-Peds) residency program directors' attitudes regarding end-of-residency clinic handoff systems and perceived barriers to their implementation.

METHODS

We surveyed all Med-Peds program directors in the United States about end-of-residency outpatient handoff systems.

RESULTS

Program directors rated systems as important (81.5%), but only 31 programs (46.3%) utilized them. Nearly all programs with (29/31 [93.5%]), and most programs without systems (24/33 [72.7%]) rated them as important. Programs were more likely to have a system if the program director rated it important (p = .049), and less likely if they cited a lack of faculty interest (p = .023) or difficulty identifying residents as primary providers (p = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Most program directors believe it important to formally hand off outpatients. Barriers to establishing handoff systems can be overcome with modest curricular and cultural changes.