So Many Ways to Be Wrong: Completeness and Accuracy in a Prospective Study of OR-to-ICU Handoff Standardization.

BACKGROUND: Studies focused on improving handoffs often measure the quality of information exchange using information completeness without reporting on accuracy. The present investigation aimed to characterize changes in the accuracy of transmitted patient information after standardization of operating room (OR)-to-ICU handoffs. METHODS: Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) was a mixed methods study conducted in two US ICUs. From 2014 to 2016, trained observers captured the nature and content of information transmitted during OR-to-ICU handoffs, comparing this to the electronic medical record. Inconsistencies were compared before and after handoff standardization. Semistructured interviews initially conducted for implementation were reanalyzed to contextualize quantitative findings. RESULTS: A total of 160 OR-to-ICU handoffs were observed-63 before and 97 after standardization. Across seven categories of information, including allergies, past surgical history, and IV fluids, two types of inaccuracy were observed: incomplete information (for example, providing only a partial list of allergies) and incorrect information. Before standardization, an average of 3.5 information elements per handoff were incomplete, and 0.11 were incorrect. After standardization, the number of incomplete information elements per handoff decreased to 2.4 (-1.1, p < 0.001), and the number of incorrect items was similar, at 0.16 (p = 0.54). Interviews revealed that the familiarity of a transporting OR provider (for example, surgeon, anesthetist) with the patient's case was considered an important factor affecting information exchange. CONCLUSION: Handoff accuracy improved after standardizing OR-to-ICU handoffs in a two-ICU study. The improvement in accuracy was due to improved completeness rather than a change in the transmission of inaccurate information.

Feasibility and impact of a postpartum hemorrhage emergency care package using a bundle approach in Migori County, Kenya.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of the PPH Emergency Care package (PPH EmC)-a holistic intervention that uses a bundle approach that has been implemented in Kenya, India, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Central America-in a low-resource setting. METHODS: The feasibility and impact of PPH EmC implementation in Migori County, Kenya was studied using a qualitative research design. In March and April 2022 key informants were identified using purposive sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted over Zoom from March to May 2022 until thematic saturation was reached. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for emerging themes. RESULTS: PPH EmC has positively impacted facility and health system preparedness, referral coordination, teamwork and communication, and overall capacity to provide quality PPH emergency care. Participants reported that PPH EmC is sustainable because of its low cost and support from local partners. CONCLUSION: Implementation of PPH EmC in Migori County, Kenya was feasible and positively impacted PPH emergency care.

Breast-Specific Sensuality in Breast Cancer Survivors: Sexually Active or Not.

BACKGROUND: We sought to better understand breast-specific sensuality (BSS) in sexually inactive breast cancer survivors. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of breast cancer survivors during surveillance appointments from 2014 to 2016. Sexual inactivity was defined as no sexual activity within 4 weeks prior. Categorical data were analyzed using Fisher's exact test. Multiple logistic regression adjusted for age and menopausal status, and Firth's bias correction accommodated sparse data. RESULTS: Of 585 respondents, 546 (93.3%) were between the ages of 40 and 79 years, of whom 285 (48.7%) were sexually inactive. Favorable post-treatment appearance satisfaction was reported by 413 (71.0%) respondents. Sexually inactive respondents were more likely to score discomfort with their partner seeing their chest after surgery compared with sexually active respondents (41 [20.4%] vs. 34 [11.4%]; p = 0.002). Both sexually inactive and active respondents reported that their chest was important in intimacy after surgery but at significantly different rates (117 [44.3%] vs. 217 [72.6%]; p < 0.001). Post-surgical appearance satisfaction for sexually inactive respondents was positively associated with level of comfort with partner seeing their chest after surgery (p < 0.001) and with rating of a pleasurable caress of the treated breast (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Over 40% of sexually inactive respondents reported their chest was important in intimacy after surgery, suggesting that BSS may be a route to intimacy for sexually inactive breast cancer survivors. Post-surgical breast appearance satisfaction significantly correlated with comfort being seen by one's partner and appreciation of a pleasurable breast caress. Optimizing breast cancer surgical aesthetic outcomes may improve survivorship.

A Partially Structured Postoperative Handoff Protocol Improves Communication in 2 Mixed Surgical Intensive Care Units: Findings From the Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of standardizing operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs in a mixed surgical population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Standardizing OR to ICU handoffs improves information transfer after cardiac surgery, but there is limited evidence in other surgical contexts. METHODS: This prospective interventional cohort study (NCT02267174) was conducted in 2 surgical ICUs in 2 affiliated hospitals. From 2014 to 2016, we developed, implemented, and assessed the effectiveness of a new standardized handoff protocol requiring bedside clinician communication using an information template. The primary study outcome was number of information omissions out of 13 possible topics, recorded by trained observers. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, and multivariable regression. RESULTS: We observed 165 patient transfers (68 pre-, 97 postintervention). Before standardization, observed handoffs had a mean 4.7 ±â€Š2.9 information omissions each. After standardization, information omissions decreased 21.3% to 3.7 ±â€Š1.9 (P = 0.023). In a pre-specified subanalysis, information omissions for new ICU patients decreased 36.2% from 4.7 ±â€Š3.1 to 3.0 ±â€Š1.6 (P = 0.008, interaction term P = 0.008). The decrement in information omissions was linearly associated with the number of protocol steps followed (P < 0.001). After controlling for patient stability, the intervention was still associated with reduced omissions. Handoff duration increased after standardization from 4.1 ±â€Š3.3 to 8.0 ±â€Š3.9 minutes (P < 0.001). ICU mortality and length of stay did not change postimplementation. CONCLUSION: Standardizing OR to ICU handoffs significantly improved information exchange in 2 mixed surgical ICUs, with a concomitant increase in handoff duration. Additional research is needed to identify barriers to and facilitators of handoff protocol adherence.

Developing a Standard Handoff Process for Operating Room-to-ICU Transitions: Multidisciplinary Clinician Perspectives from the Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) Study.

BACKGROUND: Operating room (OR)-to-ICU handoffs place patients at risk for preventable harm. Numerous studies have described standardized handoff procedures following cardiac surgery, but no existing literature describes a general OR-to-ICU handoff system. METHODS: As part of the Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) study, a postoperative handoff procedure was developed by conducting interviews and focus groups with staff routinely involved in OR-to-ICU patient transitions in two mixed surgical ICUs, which included nurses, house staff, and advanced practice providers. Transcripts were analyzed according to grounded theory. Surveys, attending physician interviews, and field notes further informed process development. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 62 individuals, and three focus groups were held with 19 participants. Clinicians endorsed the importance of the OR-to-ICU handoff but identified several barriers to consistently achieving an ideal handoff-mainly, time pressure, unclear expectations, and confusion about other clinicians' informational needs. Participants were receptive to a standardized handoff process, provided that it was not overly prescriptive. Surveys (n = 132) revealed unreliable information transfer with current OR-to-ICU handoffs. These findings and preexisting OR-to-ICU handoff literature were used to develop a novel handoff process and information template suitable for standard use in a mixed surgical ICU. CONCLUSION: OR and ICU teams agreed on handoffs' importance but expressed important barriers to consistently practicing ideal handoffs. Future work is needed to determine whether the handoff procedures developed by incorporating bedside provider perspectives improve patient outcomes.

Handoffs and transitions in critical care (HATRICC): protocol for a mixed methods study of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Operating room to intensive care unit handoffs are high-risk events for critically ill patients. Studies in selected patient populations show that standardizing operating room to intensive care unit handoffs improves information exchange and decreases errors. To adapt these findings to mixed surgical populations, we propose to study the implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process in two intensive care units currently without an existing standard process. METHODS/DESIGN: The Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) study is a hybrid effectiveness- implementation trial of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs. We will use mixed methods to conduct a needs assessment of the current handoff process, adapt published handoff processes, and implement a new standardized handoff process in two academic intensive care units. Needs assessment: We will use non-participant observation to observe the current handoff process. Focus groups, interviews, and surveys of clinicians will elicit participants' impressions about the current process. Adaptation and implementation: We will adapt published standardized handoff processes using the needs assessment findings. We will use small group simulation to test the new process' feasibility. After simulation, we will incorporate the new handoff process into the clinical work of all providers in the study units. EVALUATION: Using the same methods employed in the needs assessment phase, we will evaluate use of the new handoff process. DATA ANALYSIS: The primary effectiveness outcome is the number of information omissions per handoff episode as compared to the pre-intervention period. Additional intervention outcomes include patient intensive care unit length of stay and intensive care unit mortality. The primary implementation outcome is acceptability of the new process. Additional implementation outcomes include feasibility, fidelity and sustainability. DISCUSSION: The HATRICC study will examine the effectiveness and implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process. Findings from this study have the potential to improve healthcare communication and outcomes for critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02267174. Date of registration October 16, 2014.