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.

Effects of an Experiential Trauma Bootcamp on PGY 3 Anesthesiology Residents' Knowledge and Confidence Levels.

Background: Bootcamp-style education involves short, intense educational sessions and is a proven educational modality in anesthesia medical education. However, rarely has it been used with senior anesthesiology residents and never in exposing these residents to a curriculum aimed at care of the trauma patient. The purpose of this study was to design and implement an experiential bootcamp to prepare anesthesiology residents to take senior trauma call at a Level 1 trauma center in the Southeastern United States. Methods: Before taking senior trauma call, 21 postgraduate year 3 anesthesiology residents took part in an 8-hour trauma bootcamp that combined flipped classroom-style education with immersive, procedural, and augmented reality simulation facilitated by subject matter experts. Before and after the bootcamp, residents completed 17-item confidence and 20-item knowledge questionnaires developed by the study authors. Results were compared before and after the bootcamp to determine overall change in confidence and knowledge levels pertaining to caring for trauma patients and taking senior trauma call. Additionally, residents completed an evaluation measuring their perceptions of the benefit of the educational offering. Results: Statistically significant increases were seen in 16 out of 17 confidence questions (P < .001) and 12 out of 20 knowledge questions (P < .001). Additionally, respondents indicated that they found the content to be valuable and likely to improve their care delivery within the clinical setting. Conclusions: Following this bootcamp, postcourse surveys demonstrated that residents' knowledge and confidence increased significantly through simulation combined with a flipped-classroom approach in preparation for senior trauma call.

Development and content validation of the checklist for assessing placement of a small-bore chest tube (CAPS) for small-bore chest tube placement.

Background: Small-bore chest tube (SBCT) placement via modified Seldinger technique is a commonly performed invasive procedure for treatment of pleural effusion and pneumothorax. When performed suboptimally, it may lead to serious complications. Validated checklists are central to teaching and assessing procedural skills and may result in improved health care quality. In this paper, we describe the development and content validation of a SBCT placement checklist. Methods: A literature review across multiple medical databases and seminal textbooks was performed to identify all publications describing procedural steps involved in SBCT placement. No studies were identified that involved systematic development of a checklist for this purpose. After the first iteration of a comprehensive checklist (CAPS) based on literature review was developed, the modified Delphi technique involving a panel of nine multidisciplinary experts was used to modify it and establish its content validity. Results: After four Delphi rounds, the mean expert-rated Likert score across all checklist items was 6.85 ± 0.68 (out of 7). The final, 31-item checklist had a high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.846) with 95% of the responses (by nine experts across 31 checklist items) being a numerical score of 6 or 7. Conclusions: This study reports the development and content validity of a comprehensive checklist for teaching and assessing SBCT placement. For purposes of demonstrating construct validity, this checklist should next be studied in the simulation and clinical setting.

Anesthesiology Patient Handoff Education Interventions: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology provider handoffs are complex, occur frequently, and have been associated with adverse patient outcomes. The authors sought to determine the degree to which anesthesiology handoff studies with educational interventions incorporated tenets of educational best practices. METHODS: The research team conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature focused on handoff studies with education interventions that included anesthesiology providers. Searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and ERIC (2010-September 2021). Each phase of the article review process included at least two trained independent reviewers. In addition, pairs of trained reviewers abstracted study characteristics RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. Two thirds (18/26; 69.2%) were published after 2017, and almost three fourths (19/26; 73.1%) included learners. Education intervention descriptions varied, with only 15.4% (4/26) briefly mentioning education theory, 7.7% (2/26) with clear education objectives, and 7.7% (2/26) assessing curriculum via participant satisfaction. Most (22/26; 84.6%) assessed Kirkpatrick's level 3 (handoff behavior change), and 26.9% (7/26) assessed level 4b (patient outcomes). Medical education quality scores were low (range 6-24, mean 11.3; max 32), with more than half (15/26; 57.7%) receiving scores ≤ 10. CONCLUSION: Educational interventions demonstrate marked heterogeneity in the use of educational theoretical concepts and established curriculum development best practices. Future studies should report on important aspects of educational interventions, which would allow for comparison across studies, yield the essential data needed to identify handoff education best practices, and improve patient safety.

Comparing traditional, immersive simulation with Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice in postgraduate year 2 anesthesiology residents.

BACKGROUND: Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice (RCDP) is an increasingly popular simulation technique that allows learners to achieve mastery of skills through repetition, feedback, and increasing difficulty. This manuscript describes the implementation and assessment of RCDP in an anesthesia residency curriculum. METHODS: Researchers describe the comparison of RCDP with traditional instructional methods for anesthesiology residents' application of Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) and communication principles in a simulated environment. Residents (n = 21) were randomly assigned to either Traditional or RCDP education groups, with each resident attending 2 days of bootcamp. On their first day, the Traditional group received a lecture, then participated in a group, immersive simulation with reflective debriefing. The RCDP group received education through an RCDP simulation session. On their second bootcamp day, all participants individually engaged in an immersive simulation, then completed the "Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Learning" survey. Application of ECC and communication principles during the simulation was scored by a blinded reviewer through video review. Participants ended the bootcamp by ranking the experiences they found most valuable. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the different group members' individual performances during the immersive simulation, nor in the experiences they deemed most valuable. However, the Traditional education group reported higher levels of satisfaction and self-confidence in learning in 5 areas (p = 0.004-0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of RCDP or Traditional education grouping, anesthesia residents demonstrated no difference in ECC skill level or perceived value of interventions. However, members of the Traditional education group reported higher levels of satisfaction and self-confidence in numerous areas. Additional RCDP opportunities in the anesthesia residency program should be considered prior to excluding it as an educational method in our program.

Incoming Interns Recognize Inadequate Physical Examination as a Cause of Patient Harm.

INTRODUCTION: As providers of a large portion of the care delivered at academic health centers, medical trainees have a unique perspective on medical error. Despite data suggesting that errors in physical examination (PE) can lead to adverse patient events, we are not aware of previous studies exploring medical trainee perceptions of the relationship between patient harm and inadequate PE. We investigated whether first-year residents at a large tertiary care academic medical center perceive inadequate PE as a cause of adverse patient events. METHODS: As part of a larger survey given to incoming interns at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital orientation (2014-2018), the authors examined the perceptions of inadequate PE and adverse patient events. We also examined other details related to PE educational experiences and self-reported PE proficiency. The survey was developed a priori by the authors and assessed for face validity by expert faculty. RESULTS: Ninety-eight percent of respondents (695/706) reported that inadequate PE leads to adverse patient events. Seventy percent (492/706) believe that inadequate PE causes adverse events in up to 10% of all patient encounters, and 30% (214/706) reported that inadequate PE causes adverse events in greater than 10% of patient encounters. Forty-five percent of surveyed interns (319/715) had witnessed a patient safety issue as a result of an inadequate PE. Only 2% of surveyed interns (11/706) did not think patients experience adverse events because of inadequate PEs. Ninety percent of surveyed interns (643/712) reported feeling proficient in performing PE. From 2015 to 2018, 80% (486/604) indicated that they received "just enough" PE education. CONCLUSION: Nearly all incoming interns surveyed at our institution believe that inadequate PE leads to adverse patient events, and 45% have witnessed an adverse patient event due to inadequate PE. We urge clinicians, educators, and health care administrators to consider enhanced PE skills training as an important and viable approach to medical error reduction, and as such, we propose a 5-pronged intervention for improvement, including a redesign of PE curricula, development of checklist-based assessment methods, ongoing skills training and assessment of physicians-in-practice, rigorous study of PE maneuvers, and research into whether enhanced PE skills improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of a Nurse-Nurse Handoff Mnemonic With Real-World Handoffs.

BACKGROUND: Communication failures, including clinical handoff or clinical handover errors, contribute to 80% of all serious preventable adverse events each year. The N-PAS, N = Nurse, P = Patient Summary, A = Action Plan, and S = Synthesis, is a flexible standardized clinical handoff tool for nurses. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of N-PAS core components present in real-world patient handoffs. METHODS: A mixed-methods design was used to analyze secondary data. Patient handoffs (n = 138) were transcribed into statements and then independently coded by 2 research assistants. RESULTS: Of all handoff statements, 63.2% were coded as Patient Summary and 13.6% were coded as Action Plan, whereas Synthesis was not coded in any handoffs. Three new Patient Summary elements and 1 new Action Plan element were identified. CONCLUSION: Patient Summary and Action Plan are critical data reported during clinical handoff. A handoff synthesis is a critical step to include in handoff training.

Systematic Review of Handoff Mnemonics Literature.

A systematic review of published English-language articles on handoffs is conducted (1987 to June 4, 2008). Forty-six articles describing 24 handoff mnemonics are identified by trained reviewers. The majority (82.6%) have been published in the last 3 years (2006-2008), and SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) is the most frequently cited mnemonic (69.6%). Of 7 handoff research articles, only 4 study mnemonics. All 4 of these studies have relatively small sample sizes (10-100) and lack validated instruments. Only 1 study has obtained IRB approval. Scientifically rigorous research studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of handoff mnemonics. These should be published in the peer-reviewed literature using the Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) guidelines.

Graduate medical education scholarly activities initiatives: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: According to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education residents "should participate in scholarly activity." The development of a sustainable, successful resident scholarship program is a difficult task faced by graduate medical education leadership. METHODS: A medical librarian conducted a systematic literature search for English language articles published on scholarly activities initiatives in Graduate Medical Education (GME) between January 2003 and March 31 2017. Inclusion criteria included implementing a graduate medical education research curriculum or initiative designed to enhance intern, resident, or fellow scholarly activities using a control or comparison group. We defined major outcomes as increases in publications or presentations. Random effects meta-analysis was used to compare the rate of publications before and after implementation of curriculum or initiative. RESULTS: We identified 32 relevant articles. Twenty-nine (91%) reported on resident publications, with 35% (10/29) reporting statistically significant increases. Fifteen articles (47%) reported on regional, national, or international presentations, with only 13% (2/15) reporting a statistically significant increase in productivity. Nineteen studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis; for these studies, the post-initiative publication rate was estimated to be 2.6 times the pre-intervention rate (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.3; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review identified 32 articles describing curricula and initiatives used by GME programs to increase scholarly activity. The three most frequently reported initiatives were mentors (88%), curriculum (59%), and protected time (59%). Although no specific strategy was identified as paramount to improved productivity, meta-analysis revealed that the publication rate was significantly higher following the implementation of an initiative. Thus, we conclude that a culture of emphasis on resident scholarship is the most important step. We call for well-designed research studies with control or comparison groups and a power analysis focused on identifying best practices for future scholarly activities curricula and initiatives.

A Delphi study to identify the core components of nurse to nurse handoff.

AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the core components of nurse-nurse handoffs. BACKGROUND: Patient handoffs involve a process of passing information, responsibility and control from one caregiver to the next during care transitions. Around the globe, ineffective handoffs have serious consequences resulting in wrong treatments, delays in diagnosis, longer stays, medication errors, patient falls and patient deaths. To date, the core components of nurse-nurse handoff have not been identified. This lack of identification is a significant gap in moving towards a standardized approach for nurse-nurse handoff. DESIGN: Mixed methods design using the Delphi technique. METHODS: From May 2016 - October 2016, using a series of iterative steps, a panel of handoff experts gave feedback on the nurse-nurse handoff core components and the content in each component to be passed from one nurse to the next during a typical unit-based shift handoff. Consensus was defined as 80% agreement or higher. RESULTS/FINDINGS: After three rounds of participant review, 17 handoff experts with backgrounds in clinical nursing practice, academia and handoff research came to consensus on the core components of handoff: patient summary, action plan and nurse-nurse synthesis. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to identify the core components of nurse-nurse handoff. Subsequent testing of the core components will involve evaluating the handoff approach in a simulated and then actual patient care environment. Our long-term goal is to improve patient safety outcomes by validating an evidence-based handoff framework and handoff curriculum for pre-licensure nursing programmes that strengthen the quality of their handoff communication as they enter clinical practice.

What Every Graduating Resident Needs to Know About Quality Improvement and Patient Safety: A Content Analysis of 26 Sets of ACGME Milestones.

PURPOSE: Quality improvement (QI) and patient safety (PS) are broadly relevant to the practice of medicine, but specialty-specific milestones demonstrate variable expectations for trainee competency in QI/PS. The purpose of this study was to develop a unifying portrait of QI/PS expectations for graduating residents irrespective of specialty. METHOD: Milestones from 26 residency programs representing the 24 member boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties were downloaded from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Web site in 2015. A codebook was generated by in-depth reading of all milestone sets by two authors. Using a content analytic approach, milestones were then coded by a single author, with a 25% sample double coded by another author. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize frequency counts. RESULTS: Of 612 total milestones, 249 (40.7%) made mention of QI/PS. A median 10 milestones per specialty (interquartile range, 5.25-11.75) mentioned QI/PS. There were 446 individual references to QI, 423 references to PS, and another 1,065 references to QI/PS-related concepts, including patient-centered care, cost-effective practice, documentation, equity, handoffs and care transitions, and teamwork. QI/PS references reflected expectations about both individual-level practice (531/869; 61.1%) and practice within a health care system (338/869; 38.9%). QI and PS references were linked to all six ACGME core competencies. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is variability in the emphasis placed on QI/PS across specialties, overall, QI/PS is reflected in more than 40% of residency milestones. Graduating residents in all specialties are expected to demonstrate competence in QI, PS, and multiple related concepts.

Patient Handoff Education: Are Medical Schools Catching Up?

Communication errors during shift-to-shift handoffs are a leading cause of preventable adverse events. Nevertheless, handoff skills are variably taught at medical schools. The authors administered questionnaires on handoffs to interns during orientation. Questions focused on medical school handoff education, experiences, and perceptions. The majority (546/718) reported having some form of education on handoffs during medical school, with 48% indicating this was 1 hour or less. Most respondents (98%) reported that they believe patients experience adverse events because of inadequate handoffs, and more than one third had witnessed a patient safety issue. Results show that medical school graduates are not receiving adequate handoff training. Yet graduates are expected to conduct safe patient handoffs at the start of residency. Given that ineffective handoffs pose a significant patient safety risk, medical school graduates should have a baseline competency in handoff skills. This will require medical schools to develop, implement, and study handoff education.

Transthoracic Echocardiography for Diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common diagnosis with significant mortality if not appropriately treated. The use of transthoracic echocardiography in patients with PE is common; however, its diagnostic capabilities in this use are unclear. With the increased use of ultrasonography in medical settings, it is important to understand the strengths and limitations of echocardiography for the diagnosis of PE. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE through 2016 for articles assessing the diagnostic accuracy of transthoracic echocardiography for PE. Two authors independently abstracted relevant data from the studies. We assessed quality using the QUADAS-2 tool for diagnostic studies. RESULTS: Undefined "right heart strain" was the most common sign used, and it had a sensitivity of 53% (95% CI, 45%-61%) and a specificity of 83% (95% CI, 74%-90%). Eleven other distinct signs were identified: ventricle size ratio, abnormal septal motion, tricuspid regurgitation, 60/60 sign, McConnell's sign, right heart thrombus, right ventricle hypokinesis, pulmonary hypertension, right ventricular end-diastolic diameter, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, and right ventricular systolic pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Studies show a consistently high specificity and low sensitivity for echocardiography in the diagnosis of PE, making it potentially adequate as a rule-in test at the bedside in critical care settings such as the emergency department and intensive care unit for patients with a suspicion of PE, especially those unable to get other confirmatory studies. Future research may continue to clarify the role of bedside echocardiography in conjunction with other tests and imaging in the overall management of PE.

Role of apoptosis and autophagy in tuberculosis.

Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the oldest known human diseases and is transmitted by the bacteria Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb). TB has a rich history with evidence of TB infections dating back to 5,800 bc TB is unique in its ability to remain latent in an individual for decades, with the possibility of later reactivation, causing widespread systemic symptoms. Currently, it is estimated that more than one-third of the world's population (~2 billion people) are infected with Mtb. Prolonged periods of therapy and complexity of treatment regimens, especially in active infection, have led to poor compliance in patients being treated for TB. Therefore, it is vitally important to have a thorough knowledge of the pathophysiology of Mtb to understand the disease progression, as well as to develop novel diagnostic tests and treatments. Alveolar macrophages represent both the primary host cell and the first line of defense against the Mtb infection. Apoptosis and autophagy of macrophages play a vital role in the pathogenesis and also in the host defense against Mtb. This review will outline the role of these two cellular processes in defense against Mtb with particular emphasis on innate immunity and explore developing therapies aimed at altering host responses to the disease.

Feedback and Assessment Tools for Handoffs: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Resident handoff communication skills are essential components of medical education training. There are no previous systematic reviews of feedback and evaluation tools for physician handoffs. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review of articles focused on inpatient handoff feedback or assessment tools. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of English-language literature published from January 1, 2008, to May 13, 2015 on handoff feedback or assessment tools used in undergraduate or graduate medical education. All articles were reviewed by 2 independent abstractors. Included articles were assessed using a quality scoring system. RESULTS: A total of 26 articles with 32 tools met inclusion criteria, including 3 focused on feedback, 8 on assessment, and 15 on both feedback and assessment. All tools were used in an inpatient setting. Feedback and/or assessment improved the content or organization measures of handoff, while process and professionalism measures were less reliably improved. The Handoff Clinical Evaluation Exercise or a similar tool was used most frequently. Of included studies, 23% (6 of 26) were validity evidence studies, and 31% (8 of 26) of articles included a tool with behavioral anchors. A total of 35% (9 of 26) of studies used simulation or standardized patient encounters. CONCLUSIONS: A number of feedback and assessment tools for physician handoffs in several specialties have been studied. Limited research has been done on the studied tools. These tools may assist medical educators in assessing trainees' handoff skills.

Shift-to-Shift Handoff Effects on Patient Safety and Outcomes.

Multiple health care organizations have identified handoffs as a source of clinical errors; however, few studies have linked handoff interventions to improved patient outcomes. This systematic review of English-language research articles, published January 2008 to May 2015 and focusing on shift-to-shift handoff interventions and patient outcomes, yielded 10 774 unique articles. Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria, measuring each of the following: patient falls (n = 7), reportable events (n = 6), length of stay (n = 4), mortality (n = 4), code calls (n = 4), medication errors (n = 4), medical errors (n = 3), procedural complications (n = 2), pressure ulcers (n = 2), weekend discharges (n = 2), and nosocomial infections (n = 2). One study each also measured time to first intervention, restraint use, overnight transfusions, and out-of-hours deteriorations. Studies that reported funding had higher quality scores. It is difficult to identify trends in the handoff research because of simultaneous implementation of multiple interventions and heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes measured, and settings. The authors call for increased handoff research funding, especially for studies that include patient outcome measures.