Association of Anesthesiologist Handovers With Short-term Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Complete handover of anesthesia care to a second anesthesiologist has been demonstrated to be associated with worse short-term adverse outcomes among cardiac surgery patients, but little information from multi-institutional studies is available. METHODS: New York's cardiac surgery registry was used to identify patients who underwent cardiac surgery in New York between 2010 and 2016 with and without complete handovers of anesthesia care. A retrospective observational study with inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score was used to adjust for differences in preoperative patient characteristics while comparing differences in the primary outcome (in-hospital/30 day mortality), major complications in the index admission or within 30 days of the index surgery, readmissions within 30 days, and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 8.5% of the 103,102 cardiac surgery procedures involved complete handovers. After adjustment, there was a difference between patients with and without handovers in the primary outcome (2.86% vs 2.48%, adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 1.15 [1.01-1.31]). There was no difference in readmissions within 30 days (13.7% vs 14.4%, ARR = 0.95 [0.90-1.00]), and the differences in complications and length of stay were not clinically meaningful (adjusted differences of <10%). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac surgery patients in New York who had complete anesthesia handovers experienced higher short-term mortality rates, but there were no meaningful differences in other outcomes. Unnecessary handovers should be carefully monitored.

Development and implementation of a standardised emergency department intershift handover tool to improve physician communication.

BACKGROUND: Structured handover can reduce communication breakdowns and potential medical errors. In our emergency department (ED) we identified a safety risk due to variation in quality and content of overnight handovers between physicians. AIM: Our goal was to develop and implement a standardised ED-specific handover tool using quality improvement (QI) methodology. We aimed to increase the proportion of patients having adequate handover information conveyed at overnight shift change from a baseline of 50%-75% in 4 months. METHODS: We used published best practices, stakeholder input and local data to develop a tool customised for intershift ED handovers. Implementation methods included education, cognitive aids, policy change and plan-do-study-act cycles informed by end-user feedback. We monitored progress using direct observation convenience sampling. MEASURES: Our outcome measure was proportion of adequate patient handovers (defined as >50% of handover components communicated per patient) per overnight handover session. Tool utilisation characteristics were used for process measurement, and time metrics for balancing measures. We report changes using statistical process control charts and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We observed 49 overnight handover sessions from 2017 to 2019, evaluating handovers of 850 patients. Our improvement target was met in 10 months (median=76.1%) and proportion of adequate handovers continued to improve to median=83.0% at the postimprovement audit. Written communication of handover information increased from a median of 19.2% to 68.7%. Handover time increased by median=31 s per patient. End-users subjectively reported improved communication quality and value for resident education. CONCLUSIONS: We achieved sustained improvements in the amount of information communicated during physician ED handovers using established QI methodologies. Engaging stakeholders in handover tool customisation for local context was an important success factor. We believe this approach can be easily adopted by any ED.

A novel social work approach to emergency department buprenorphine induction and warm hand-off to community providers.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is considered gold standard treatment for persons with an opioid use disorder and can be successfully initiated in emergency departments (EDBUP). Perceived provider barriers to EDBUP adoption include increased provider work, lack of provider knowledge about outpatient MOUD resources, and a lack of viable MOUD treatment options within health systems. We evaluated the feasibility of a novel EDBUP institutional design that utilizes the social work team to drive ED care for patients with OUD and coordinate MOUD referral to existing community resources. METHODS: This is a retrospective, cohort, single-center study describing patient outcomes in a social work driven EDBUP program with referral to community MOUD providers. ED patients with OUD were identified via patient request, standardized nurse screening, or ED provider concern. All identified patients received an urgent social work consult to explore willingness to seek treatment for OUD. Social workers developed individualized follow up plans with participating patients. Clinical data was abstracted from the Electronic Health Record. Social workers tracked continuity with outpatient MOUD services in a clinical care database. RESULTS: From June 1, 2018 through August 31, 2019, 120 patients opted for ED buprenorphine induction. 61% presented to initial outpatient intake appointment and 39% remained engaged in treatment after 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: EDs can effectively utilize the expertise of social workers to drive EDBUP and coordinate outpatient MOUD referrals. Our interdisciplinary EDBUP program structure is feasible and has the potential to yield meaningful reductions in physician workload and ED cost.

Oligoanalgesia in Patients With an Initial Glasgow Coma Scale Score ≥8 in a Physician-Staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Service: A Multicentric Secondary Data Analysis of >100,000 Out-of-Hospital Emergency Missions.

BACKGROUND: Oligoanalgesia, as well as adverse events related to the initiated pain therapy, is prevalent in out-of-hospital emergency medicine, even when a physician is present. We sought to identify factors involved in insufficient pain therapy of patients presenting with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of ≥8 in the out-of-hospital phase, when therapy is provided by a physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service (p-HEMS). METHODS: This was a multicenter, secondary data analysis of conscious patients treated in primary p-HEMS missions between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017. Patients with a numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score ≥4, GCS score ≥8 on the scene, without cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and a National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) score

Training in communication and interaction during shift-to-shift nursing handovers in a bilingual hospital: A case study.

AIM: To explore the perceptions and practices of nurses on handovers. BACKGROUND: At handover, accountability must be transferred to ensure a consistent quality of patient care. Studies highlighted unstructured handovers as a major factor contributing to critical incidents. The design of handover training requires a systematic method for evaluating nurses' practices. DESIGN: An explorative case study, qualitative design that combined ethnography with discourse analysis. METHODS: A training programme based on these practices was administered to 50 nurses, and a protocol focused on CARE was implemented. The nurses' perceptions and practices were evaluated, and 80 handovers were recorded. RESULTS: Three areas likely to enhance the continuity of care emerged: 1) explicit transfer of responsibility by outgoing nurses; 2) responsible engagement of incoming nurses in the handover and 3) adherence to a systematic handover structure. CONCLUSION: The change in practice from monologic handovers with passive incoming nurses before training to interactive and collaborative handovers, where all nurses appeared to take an active role in clarifying patients' cases, after training was significant.

Patient and healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes and barriers to handover and healthcare communication during chronic disease inpatient care in India: a qualitative exploratory study.

OBJECTIVES: 1) To investigate patient and healthcare provider (HCP) knowledge, attitudes and barriers to handover and healthcare communication during inpatient care. 2) To explore potential interventions for improving the storage and transfer of healthcare information. DESIGN: Qualitative study comprising 41 semi-structured, individual interviews and a thematic analysis using the Framework Method with analyst triangulation. SETTING: Three public hospitals in Himachal Pradesh and Kerala, India. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 20 male (n=10) and female (n=10) patients with chronic non-communicable disease (NCD) and 21 male (n=15) and female (n=6) HCPs. Purposive sampling was used to identify patients with chronic NCDs (cardiovascular disease, chronic respiratory disease, diabetes or hypertension) and HCPs. RESULTS: Patient themes were (1) public healthcare service characteristics, (2) HCP to patient communication and (3) attitudes regarding medical information. HCP themes were (1) system factors, (2) information exchange practices and (3) quality improvement strategies. Both patients and HCPs recognised public healthcare constraints that increased pressure on hospitals and subsequently limited consultation times. Systemic issues reported by HCPs were a lack of formal handover systems, training and accessible hospital-based records. Healthcare management communication during admission was inconsistent and lacked patient-centredness, evidenced by varying reports of patient information received and some dissatisfaction with lifestyle advice. HCPs reported that the duty of writing discharge notes was passed from senior doctors to interns or nurses during busy periods. A nurse reported providing predominantly verbal discharge instructions to patients. Patient-held medical documents facilitated information exchange between HCPs, but doctors reported that they were not always transported. HCPs and patients expressed positive views towards the idea of introducing patient-held booklets to improve the organisation and transfer of medical documents. CONCLUSIONS: Handover and healthcare communication during chronic NCD inpatient care is currently suboptimal. Structured information exchange systems and HCP training are required to improve continuity and safety of care during critical transitions such as referral and discharge. Our findings suggest that patient-held booklets may also assist in enhancing handover and patient-centred practices.

Perceptions and Experiences of Hospital Nurses During Transition to an Electronic Handover Informatics System.

An effective patient transfer, or handover, among healthcare professionals can help prevent communication-related medical errors, and a reliable electronic handover informatics system can standardize the handoff process. Adapting to a new handover system may cause stress for nurses. This descriptive qualitative study aimed to explore the perceptions and transition experiences of hospital nurses in adopting and adapting to a new handover informatics system. Thirty-eight nurses at a medical center in Taiwan participated in the study from December 2016 to January 2017. The researcher conducted five focus group interviews and analyzed all responses using content analysis. Results showed three major themes: "Perceptions of challenges and barriers related to the transition to a new handover informatics system," "Perceptions of benefits and strategies to the transition to a new handover informatics system," and "Suggestions for successful implementation of a new handover informatics system." Five subthemes emerged from the first theme, and six subthemes emerged from the second theme. The results of this study could enhance our understanding of nurses' perceptions and experiences with transition to a new handover informatics system and could provide a reference for hospitals to develop individualized strategies to facilitate the implementation of a handover informatics system.

Change-of-Shift Nursing Handoff Interruptions: Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: The importance of change-of-shift handoffs in maintaining patient safety has been well demonstrated. Change-of-shift handoff is an important source of data used in surveillance, a nursing intervention aimed at identifying and preventing complications. Surveillance requires the nurse to acquire, process, and synthesize information (cues) encountered during patient care. Interruptions in handoff have been observed but there is a gap in the evidence concerning how interruptions during nurse-to-nurse handoff impact the change-of-shift handoff process. AIMS: To describe registered nurses' perceptions of interruptions experienced during change-of-shift handoff at the bedside in critical care units and analyze the number, type, and source of interruptions during change-of-shift handoff at the bedside. METHODS: An exploratory descriptive design was used. One hundred nurse-to-nurse handoffs were observed, and four focus groups were conducted. Observation data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and quantitative content analysis. Focus group data were analyzed with qualitative content analysis. RESULTS AND FINDINGS: Of the 1,196 interruptions observed, 800 occurred in the communication between the two nurses involved in the handoff. Over 80% (645) of these interruptions were from the nurse receiving handoff and included questions or clarification of information received. About half of the nurses reported that interruptions occurred during handoff. Focus group findings revealed that whether or not something is an interruption is determined by the individual nurse's appraisal of value added to their knowledge of the patient and/or plan of care at the time of handoff. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Interruptions during handoff are evaluated as useful or disruptive based on the value to the nurse at the time. Strict structuring or mandating of handoff elements may limit nurses' ability to communicate information deemed most relevant to the care of a specific unique patient.

Barriers and Facilitators for the Use of NURSING Bedside Handovers: Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on bedside handovers have identified nurse-related barriers and facilitators for implementing bedside handovers, but have neglected the existing ward's nursing care system as an important influencing factor. AIMS: To determine the association between the existing nursing care system (i.e., decentralized, two-tier, or centralized) on a ward and the barriers and facilitators of the bedside handover. METHODS: Structured individual interviews (N = 106) on 14 nursing wards in eight hospitals were performed before implementation of bedside handovers. The structured interview guide was based on a narrative review. Direct content analysis was used to determine the nursing care system of a ward and the degree to which barriers and facilitators were present. Pearson's Chi-square analysis was used to determine whether there were associations between the nursing care systems concerning the presence of barriers and facilitators for implementing bedside handovers. RESULTS: Twelve barriers and facilitators were identified, of which three are new to literature: the possible loss of opportunities for socializing, collegiality, and overview; head nurse's role; and role of colleagues. The extent to which barriers and facilitators were present differed across nursing care systems, with the exception of breach of confidentiality (barrier), and an existing structured handover (facilitator). Overall, nurses working in decentralized nursing care systems report fewer barriers against and more facilitators in favor of using bedside handovers than nurses in two-tier or centralized systems. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Before implementing bedside handovers, the context of the nursing care system may be considered to determine the most effective process to implement change. Based on these study findings, implementing bedside handovers could be more challenging on wards with a two-tier or centralized care system.

Improving the effectiveness of cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: analysis of a national survey of MDT members' opinions about streamlining patient discussions.

Background: Cancer is diagnosed and managed by multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in the UK and worldwide, these teams meet regularly in MDT meetings (MDMs) to discuss individual patient treatment options. Rising cancer incidence and increasing case complexity have increased pressure on MDMs. Streamlining discussions has been suggested as a way to enhance efficiency and to ensure high-quality discussion of complex cases. Methods: Secondary analysis of quantitative and qualitative data from a national survey of 1220 MDT members regarding their views about streamlining MDM discussions. Results: The majority of participants agreed that streamlining discussions may be beneficial although variable interpretations of 'streamlining' were apparent. Agreement levels varied significantly by tumour type and occupational group. The main reason for opposing streamlining were concerns about the possible impact on the quality and safety of patient care. Participants suggested a range of alternative approaches for improving efficiency in MDMs in addition to the use of treatment protocols and pre-MDT meetings. Conclusions: This work complements previous analyses in supporting the development of tumour-specific guidance for streamlining MDM discussions considering a range of approaches. The information provided about the variation in opinions between MDT for different tumour types will inform the development of these guidelines. The evidence for variation in opinions between those in different occupational groups and the reasons underlying these opinions will facilitate their implementation. The impact of any changes in MDM practices on the quality and safety of patient care requires evaluation.

I-PASS Mentored Implementation Handoff Curriculum: Champion Training Materials.

Introduction: The I-PASS Handoff Program is a comprehensive handoff curriculum that has been shown to decrease rates of medical errors and adverse events during patient handoffs. I-PASS champions are a critical part of the implementation and sustainment of this curriculum, and therefore, a rigorous program to support their training is necessary. Methods: The I-PASS Handoff champion training materials were created for the original I-PASS Study and adapted for the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program. The adapted materials embrace a flipped classroom approach and adult learning theory. The training includes an overview of I-PASS handoff techniques, an opportunity to practice evaluating handoffs with the I-PASS observation tools using a handoff video vignette, and other key implementation principles. Results: As part of the SHM I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program, 366 champions were trained at 32 sites across North America and participated in a total of 3,491 handoff observations. A total of 346 champions completed the I-PASS Champion Workshop evaluation form at the end of their training (response rate: 94.5%). After receiving the training, over 90% agreed/strongly agreed that it provided them with knowledge or skills critical to their patient care activities and that they were able to distinguish the difference between high- and poor-quality handoffs, competently use the I-PASS handoff assessment tools, and articulate the importance of handoff observations. Conclusion: The I-PASS champion training materials were rated highly by those trained and are an integral part of a successful I-PASS Handoff Program implementation.

Is privacy a problem during bedside handovers? A practice-oriented discussion paper.

Bedside handover is the delivery of the nurse-to-nurse handover at the patient's bedside. Although increasingly used in nursing, nurses report many barriers for delivering the bedside handover. Among these barriers is the possibility of breaching the patient's privacy. By referring to this concept, nurses add a legal and ethical dimension to the delivery of the bedside handover, making implementation of the method difficult or even impossible. In this discussion article, the concept of privacy during handovers is being discussed by use of observations, interviews with nurses, and interviews with patients. These findings are combined with international literature from a narrative review on the topic. We provide a practice-oriented answer in which two mutually exclusive possibilities are discussed. If bedside handover does pose problems concerning privacy, this situation is not unique in healthcare and measures can be taken during the bedside handover to safeguard the patient. If bedside handover does not pose problems concerning privacy, privacy is misused by nurses to hide professional uncertainties and/or a reluctance toward patient participation. Therefore, a possible breach of privacy-whether a justified argument or not-is not a reason for not delivering the bedside handover.

"Do You Know What I Know?": How Communication Norms and Recipient Design Shape the Content and Effectiveness of Patient Handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Poor communication during end-of-shift transfers of care (handoffs) is associated with safety risks and patient harm. Despite the common perception that handoffs are largely a one-way transfer of information, researchers have documented that they are complex interactions, guided by implicit social norms and mental frameworks. OBJECTIVES: We investigated communication strategies that resident physicians report deploying to tailor information during face-to-face handoffs that are often based on their implicit inferences about the perceived information needs and potential harm to patients. METHODS/PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 35 residents in Medicine and Surgery wards at three VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). MAIN MEASURES: We conducted qualitative interviews using audio-recorded semi-structured cognitive task interviews. KEY RESULTS: The effectiveness of handoff communication depends upon three factors: receiver characteristics, type of shift, and patient's condition and perceived acuity. Receiver characteristics, including subjective perceptions about an incoming resident's training or ability levels and their assumed preferences for information (e.g., detailed/comprehensive vs. minimal/"big picture"), influenced content shared during handoffs. Residents handing off to the night team provided more information about patients' medical histories and care plans than residents handing off to the day team, and higher patient acuity merited more detailed information and the medical service(s) involved dictated the types of information conveyed. CONCLUSIONS: We found that handoff communication involves a complex combination of socio-technical information where residents balance relational factors against content and risk. It is not a mechanistic process of merely transferring clinical data but rather is based on learned habits of communication that are context-sensitive and variable, what we refer to as "recipient design." Interventions should focus on raising awareness of times when information is omitted, customized, or expanded based on implicit judgments, the emerging threats such judgments pose to patient care and quality, and the competencies needed to be more explicit in handoff interactions.

Investigating clinical handover and healthcare communication for outpatients with chronic disease in India: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: Research concentrating on continuity of care for chronic, non-communicable disease (NCD) patients in resource-constrained settings is currently limited and focusses on inpatients. Outpatient care requires attention as this is where NCD patients often seek treatment and optimal handover of information is essential. We investigated handover, healthcare communication and barriers to continuity of care for chronic NCD outpatients in India. We also explored potential interventions for improving storage and exchange of healthcare information. METHODS: A mixed-methods design was used across five healthcare facilities in Kerala and Himachal Pradesh states. Questionnaires from 513 outpatients with cardiovascular disease, chronic respiratory disease, or diabetes covered the form and comprehensiveness of information exchange between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and between HCPs and patients. Semi-structured interviews with outpatients and HCPs explored handover, healthcare communication and intervention ideas. Barriers to continuity of care were identified through triangulation of all data sources. RESULTS: Almost half (46%) of patients self-referred to hospital outpatient clinics (OPCs). Patient-held healthcare information was often poorly recorded on unstructured sheets of paper; 24% of OPC documents contained the following: diagnosis, medication, long-term care and follow-up information. Just 55% of patients recalled receiving verbal follow-up and medication instructions during OPC appointments. Qualitative themes included patient preference for hospital visits, system factors, inconsistent doctor-patient communication and attitudes towards medical documents. Barriers were hospital time constraints, inconsistent referral practices and absences of OPC medical record-keeping, structured patient-held medical documents and clinical handover training. Patients and HCPs were in favour of the introduction of patient-held booklets for storing and transporting medical documents. CONCLUSIONS: Deficiencies in communicative practices are compromising the continuity of chronic NCD outpatient care. Targeted systems-based interventions are urgently required to improve information provision and exchange. Our findings indicate that well-designed patient-held booklets are likely to be an acceptable, affordable and effective part of the solution.

Transitioning Nurse Handoff to the Bedside: Engaging Staff and Patients.

The emergency department is a complex environment in which reliable communication is vital for safe patient care. Communication during nurse shift report can be risky without an effective report process in practice. Reliability improves with the use of a standardized, patient-centered nurse handoff process. Quality improvement methods were used to promote reliable information exchange during nurse shift handoff through the implementation of a standardized, patient-centric bedside report process. Forty-six hospital-based emergency nurses participated in the project. Outcomes were measured through observation of bedside report process, nurse, and patient surveys. Of 13 handoffs observed, 92% occurred at the bedside and 54% of patients actively participated in the report process. The offgoing nurses adopted most elements of the handoff process, while the oncoming nurses were less successful. Nurses believed that the new process influenced their ability to respond to patient needs and patients were more satisfied with nurses. A structured, patient-centered bedside handoff process can reduce safety risk and promote satisfaction with care through reliable information exchange. This implementation template for bedside handoff engages staff and patients while translating best practice.

Implementing standardized, inter-unit communication in an international setting: handoff of patients from emergency medicine to internal medicine.

Standardized handoffs may reduce communication errors, but research on handoff in community and international settings is lacking. Our study at a community hospital in the United Arab Emirates characterizes existing handoff practices for admitted patients from emergency medicine (EM) to internal medicine (IM), develops a standardized handoff tool, and assesses its impact on communication and physician perceptions. EM physicians completed a survey regarding handoff practices and expectations. Trained observers utilized a checklist based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model to observe 40 handoffs. EM and IM physicians collaboratively developed a written tool encouraging bedside handoff of admitted patients. After the intervention, surveys of EM physicians and 40 observations were subsequently repeated. 77.5% of initial observed handoffs occurred face-to-face, with 42.5% at bedside, and in four different languages. Most survey respondents considered face-to-face handoff ideal. Respondents noted 9-13 patients suffering harm due to handoff in the prior month. After handoff tool implementation, 97.5% of observed handoffs occurred face-to-face (versus 77.5%, p = 0.014), with 82.5% at bedside (versus 42.5%, p < 0.001), and all in English. Handoff was streamlined from 7 possible pathways to 3. Most post-intervention survey respondents reported improved workflow (77.8%) and safety (83.3%); none reported patient harm. Respondents and observers noted reduced inefficiency (p < 0.05). Our standardized tool increased face-to-face and bedside handoff, positively impacted workflow, and increased perceptions of safety by EM physicians in an international, non-academic setting. Our three-step approach can be applied towards developing standardized, context-specific inter-specialty handoff in a variety of settings.