Video Conference Discharge Process for NICU Infants with Medical Complexity

Purpose: Discharging infants from the NICU is complex, requiring the coordination of multiple aspects of care. Patient follow-up includes transferring medical care to primary care providers (PCP) who initially may have to rely on parents/caregivers for details about the child's history and current needs. Improving communication between the NICU and primary care offices within this pediatric health system was a goal of the organization, especially as value-based care was launched. Design: A pilot program was introduced in which families, PCP, and NICU providers for medically complex infants were offered the opportunity to participate in video conference calls. Sample: Infants selected for this pilot were those discharging from a Level IV NICU for the first time with medical complexity, such as those who would require care from multiple specialists, those with nasogastric feeding tubes, gastrostomy feeding tubes, and/or requiring oxygen post-discharge. The agenda during calls consisted of a review of the infant's birth, NICU course, and post-discharge needs. Participants were encouraged to provide detail and ask clarifying questions. Main Outcome Variable: Outcomes of this project included the evaluation of satisfaction with newer phone call methods for all participants and tracking readmission rates for those infants whose families experienced the video conference call. Results: High satisfaction levels were recorded among stakeholders as evidenced by 77 percent of parents and NICU providers being "very satisfied" or "completely satisfied" and 96 percent of primary care physicians being "very satisfied" or "completely satisfied." The rate of 30-day readmission for those who participated in the pilot was 23 percent and those readmissions were not unexpected. Conclusion: Involving families and accepting primary care physicians into the discharge communication are satisfying to stakeholders and allow participants the opportunity to have bidirectional conversations regarding the unique care needs of infants discharged from the NICU with special needs.

Improving Communication to Neonatal Resuscitation Team Members During High-Risk Births

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether implementation of a written communication tool in labor and delivery during high-risk births improves communication, preparation, and satisfaction of responding neonatal resuscitation team members.

DESIGN

Quality improvement project with a pretest and posttest design.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

Two labor and delivery units and a third labor-delivery-recovery-postpartum unit within a health care system in the southeastern United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Nurses, nurse practitioners, respiratory therapists, and physicians who are part of the neonatal resuscitation team.

INTERVENTIONS/MEASUREMENTS

A researcher-designed, written communication tool titled the High-Risk Delivery Communication Tool was implemented in the settings. A researcher-designed measurement tool titled the Neonatal High-Risk Delivery Communication Scale was used as a before-and-after survey to measure communication to the neonatal resuscitation team, preparation for high-risk births, and satisfaction with communication from labor and delivery nurses.

RESULTS

Findings from all portions of the Neonatal High-Risk Delivery Communication Scale indicated statistically significant improvements in communication, preparation, and neonatal resuscitation team member neonatal resuscitation team satisfaction while attending high-risk births. Scores improved on every item regarding hand-off, risk factor communication, preparation, and satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Implementing a communication tool for use in high-risk births may improve communication to neonatal resuscitation team members, enhance preparation for neonatal care, and increase team members' satisfaction with interprofessional communication.

Improving the handover process in a psychiatry liaison setting

Efficient handover of patient care is integral to clinical safety. Barriers in communication can lead to adverse outcomes. The Integrated Liaison Assessment Team (ILAT) has a daily handover meeting which presents several challenges to the multidisciplinary liaison team (MDT including high patient turnover, differing staff shift-work patterns, presence of visitors/students and lack of a unified approach to structured discussion at times. Areas identified for improvement included optimising efficiency, structure and handover documentation. Lack of teaching and learning opportunities were also identified. The primary aim was to reduce handover time to 30 min. The secondary aims were to improve communication by introducing the Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) tool, improve team satisfaction and introduce a teaching programme in the time saved. The Model for Improvement methodology was used with MDT focus groups and questionnaires to explore change ideas. This informed our ‘Plan, Do, Study, Act’ cycles to design a structured handover. Daily measures looked at handover length and individual team member satisfaction. Weekly measures included semiqualitative questionnaires highlighting areas for improvement. Feedback was gathered from emails and MDT discussions. A structured handover format incorporating SBAR, key task allocation and a shift handover lead was introduced. A regular MDT teaching programme was initiated. Over 4 weeks, ‘Good’ handover ratings increased from 22% to 65%; ‘Poor’ ratings decreased from 25% to 8%. Mean handover time decreased from 47 min to 31.25 min; a decrease of 33.5%. Overall, the team viewed SBAR positively as an efficiency-promoting tool. Structured handover has promoted staff competencies, team morale and information sharing practices among ILAT. MDT teaching improved team communication and confidence. Sustaining motivation to keep up interventions and documentation of handover were identified as key areas for sustained improvement.

Improving the neonatal team handoff process in a level IV NICU: reducing interruptions and handoff duration

Background

Neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients are at increased risk for handoff communication failures due to complexity and prolonged length of stay. We report a quality initiative aimed at reducing avoidable interruptions during neonatal handoffs while monitoring handoff duration and provider satisfaction.

Methods

Observational time series between August 2015 and March 2018 in an academic level IV NICU. NICU I-PASS and process changes were implemented using plan–do–study–act cycle, and statistical process control charts were used in the analysis. Unmatched preintervention and postintervention satisfaction surveys were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests.

Results

There was special cause variation in the mean number of avoidable interruptions per handoff from 4 to 0.3 (92% reduction). The mean duration of handoff was reduced ~1 min/patient. Provider satisfaction with the quality of handoffs also improved from a mean of 3.36 to 3.75 on a 1–5 Likert scale (p=0.049).

Conclusions

Standardisation of NICU handoff with NICU I-PASS and process changes led to the sustained reduction in avoidable interruptions with the added benefit of reduced handoff length and improved provider satisfaction.

Improving physician handover documentation process for patient transfer from paediatric intensive care unit to general ward

Background

Inadequate handover communication is responsible for many adverse events during the transfer of care, which can be attributed to many factors, including incomplete documentation or lack of standardised documentation process. The quality improvement project aimed to standardise the handover documentation process during patient transfer from paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) to the general paediatric ward.

Methods

Data analysis revealed lack of proper handover documentation with the omission of vital information when transferring patients from PICU to general ward. The quality improvement team assessed the current handover documentation practice using a brainstorming technique during multiple meetings. The team evaluated the process for possible causes of incomplete handover documentation, framed the existing challenges, and proposed improvement interventions, including a standardised handover form and conducting education sessions for the new proposed process. The main quality measures included physician’s compliance with handover documentation elements, physician’s satisfaction and PICU emergency readmission rate within 48 hours.

Results

Physician compliance to handover documentation improved from 29.5% to 95.5% before and after implanting the improvement interventions, respectively. The level of physician satisfaction with the quality of communicated information during the handover process improved from 47.5% to 84%, and the PICU emergency readmission rate declined from 3.8% to zero after all improvement interventions were implanted.

Conclusion

Implementation of standardised handover form is essential to improve physician compliance for clear handover documentation and to avoid data omission during the patient transfer process. Documented handover in patient’s medical record has positive impact on physician satisfaction when managing patients recently discharged from PICU.

The Standardisation of handoffs in a large academic paediatric emergency department using I-PASS

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for standardised handoffs in the emergency department (ED), few EDs have an established tool. Our aim was to improve the quality of handoffs in the ED by establishing compliance with the I-PASS handoff tool.

METHODS

This is a quality improvement (QI) initiative to standardise handoffs in a large academic paediatric ED. Following review of the literature and focus groups with key stakeholders, I-PASS was selected and modified to fit departmental needs. Implementation throughPlan-Do-Study-Act cycles included the development of educational materials, reminders and real-time feedback. Required use of I-PASS during designated team sign-out began in June 2016. Compliance with the handoff tool and handoff deficiencies was measured through observations by faculty trained in I-PASS. As a balancing measure, time to complete handoff was monitored and compared with preintervention data.

RESULTS

Compliance with I-PASS reached 80% within 6 months, 100% within 7 months and sustained at 100% during the remainder of the study period. The average percent of omissions of crucial information per handoff declined to 8.3%, which was a 53% decrease. Average percentage of tangential information and miscommunications per handoff did not show a decline. The average handoff took 20 min, which did not differ from the preintervention time. Survey results demonstrated a perceived improvement in patient safety through closed-loop communication, clear action lists and contingency planning and proper patient acuity identification.

CONCLUSIONS

I-PASS is applicable in the ED and can be successfully implemented through QI methodology contributing to an overall culture of safety.

Bedside shift report: Nurses opinions based on their experiences

BACKGROUND

Nurse bedside shift report (BSR) improves satisfaction, quality and safety. Yet, postimplementation adoption rates remain low in hospitals where BSR has been introduced. Further research is needed to understand what content is most appropriate to discuss during BSR and what facilitators are from the clinical nurses' perspective.

AIMS

Identify and describe acute care clinical nurses' and nursing supervisors' experiences and opinions regarding: process of BSR, appropriate content for BSR and barriers and facilitators related to implementation of BSR.

DESIGN

A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted at an acute care 500 bed, not-for-profit academic medical centre located in the southern United States.

METHODS

Clinical nurses (N = 22) and nursing supervisors (N = 12) from every inpatient division were recruited and interviewed. The data were analysed for relationships, similarities and differences. Themes were then identified by two independent researchers.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: (a) time constraints and clinical nurse's workflow must be taken into consideration; (b) a modified approach is necessary; (c) process and specific critical content should be individualized so that it is meaningful for all parties involved; (d) specific critical content that should be discussed outside the patient's room; and (e) specific critical content that should be discussed inside the patient's room.

CONCLUSIONS

One way to minimize interruptions is to conduct BSR using a modified approach, where a portion of the hand-off occurs inside and outside the patient's room. In addition, this study identified the nurses' preferred location where specific critical topics should be discussed.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Results from this study should be used to inform the practice BSR so the desired outcomes of patient and family satisfaction, nursing quality and patient safety can be realized. This study should influence future research aimed at identifying strategies for successful implementation and sustained use of BSR. The COREQ checklist was used to write manuscript.

Handoff improvement and adverse event reduction programme implementation in paediatric intensive care units in Argentina: a stepped-wedge trial

BACKGROUND

There are only a few studies on handoff quality and adverse events (AEs) rigorously evaluating handoff improvement programmes' effectiveness. None of them have been conducted in low and middle-income countries. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a handoff programme implementation in reducing AE frequency in paediatric intensive care units (PICUs).

METHODS

Facility-based, cluster-randomised, stepped-wedge trial in six Argentine PICUs in five hospitals, with >20 admissions per month. The study was conducted from July 2018 to May 2019, and all units at least were involved for 3 months in the control period and 4 months in the intervention period. The intervention comprised a Spanish version of the I-PASS handoff bundle consisting of a written and verbal handoff using mnemonics, an introductory workshop with teamwork training, an advertising campaign, simulation exercises, observation and standardised feedback of handoffs. Medical records (MR) were reviewed using trigger tool methodology to identify AEs (primary outcome). Handoff compliance and duration were evaluated by direct observation.

RESULTS

We reviewed 1465 MRs: 767 in the control period and 698 in the intervention period. We did not observe differences in the rates of preventable AE per 1000 days of hospitalisation (control 60.4 (37.5-97.4) vs intervention 60.4 (33.2-109.9), p=0.99, risk ratio: 1.0 (0.74-1.34)), and no changes in the categories or AE types. We evaluated 841 handoffs: 396 in the control period and 445 in the intervention period. Compliance with all items in the verbal and written handoffs was significantly higher in the intervention group. We observed no difference in the handoff time in both periods (control 35.7 min (29.6-41.8) vs intervention 34.7 min (26.5-42.1); difference 1.43 min (95% CI -2.63 to 5.49, p=0.49)). The providers' perception of improved communication did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

After the implementation of the I-PASS bundle, compliance with handoff items improved. Nevertheless, no differences were observed in the AEs' frequency or the perception of enhanced communication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03924570.

Improving quality of care in less than 1 min: a prospective intervention study on postoperative handovers to the ICU/PACU

PURPOSE

Standardisation of the postoperative handover process via checklists, trainings or procedural changes has shown to be effective in reducing information loss. The clinical friction of implementing these measures has received little attention. We developed and evaluated a visual aid (VA) and >1 min in situ training intervention to improve the quality of postoperative handovers to the intensive care unit (ICU) and postoperative care unit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The VA was constructed and implemented via a brief (<1 min) training of anaesthesiologic staff during the operation. Ease of implementation was measured by amount of information transferred, handover duration and handover structure. 50 handovers were audio recorded before intervention and 50 after intervention. External validity was evaluated by blinded assessment of the recordings by experienced anaesthesiologists (n=10) on 10-point scales.

RESULTS

The brief intervention resulted in increased information transfer (9.0-14.8 items, t(98)=7.44, p<0.0001, Cohen's d=1.59) and increased handover duration (81.3-192.8 s, t(98)=6.642, p=0.013, Cohen's d=1.33) with no loss in structure (1.60-1.56, t(98)=0.173, p=0.43). Blinded assessment on 10-point scales by experienced anaesthesiologists showed improved overall handover quality from 7.1 to 7.8 (t(98)=1.89, p=0.031, Cohen's d=0.21) and improved completeness of information (t(98)=2.42, p=0.009, Cohen's d=0.28) from 7.3 to 8.3.

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention consisting of a simple VA and <1 min instructions significantly increased overall quality and amount of information transferred during ICU/postanaesthetic care unit handovers.

Checklists in community care: reducing differences in care delivery between regular and relief staff to improve consistency and client experience

Background

Today, healthcare is more complex than just ensuring clients receive quality care; it also involves consistently delivering excellent client experience. A non-profit community support services agency conducted an extensive diagnostic journey to determine root causes of inconsistent care delivery between regular and relief frontline staff.

Local problem

Clients and family caregivers noted lower satisfaction in care delivery when a relief staff (ie, internal staff or an external agency that is covering a shift) provided service in comparison with their regular staff. The diagnostic journey discovered that the shift exchange process—when outgoing staff transfers critical knowledge to incoming staff for continuing care—varied significantly between the 11 service locations, leading to a lack of consistent service delivery, thereby impacting client experience.

Methods

A working group consisting of Supervisors of Client Services, Personal Support Workers (PSW) and management were tasked with process mapping the current state, highlighting gaps and outlining the ideal state of the shift exchange process.

Interventions

Using best practices from the aviation industry, a checklist was developed that encapsulated all the critical steps needed to be undertaken for a successful, consistent shift exchange. The theory was that the utilisation of the checklist would enable consistency and improve client satisfaction with care delivery, especially when care is delivered by a staff unfamiliar with clients.

Results

Prior to the checklist implementation, 74% of clients were satisfied or very satisfied with their relief staff, and post checklist implementation client satisfaction improved to 90%. Staff self-assessments also indicated that PSWs agreed that the checklist helped provide consistent care.

Conclusion

The use of checklists can transform the way care is delivered in the community support sector and other service delivery agencies alike to bring greater standardisation of care between providers, thus significantly improving client experience across the healthcare sector.

Impact of a blended curriculum on nursing handover quality: a quality improvement project

Context and objective

The negative consequences of inadequate nursing handovers on patient safety are widely acknowledged, both within the literature as in practice. Evidence regarding strategies to improve nursing handover is, however, lacking. This study investigates the effect of a tailored, blended curriculum on nurses’ perception of handover quality.

Methods

We used a pre-test/post-test design within four units of a Belgian general hospital. Our educational intervention consisted of an e-learning module on professional communication and a face-to-face session on the use of a structured method for handovers. All nurses completed this blended curriculum (n=87). We used the Handover Evaluation Scale (HES) to evaluate nurses’ perception of handover quality before and after the intervention. The HES was answered by 87.4% of the nurses (n=76 of 87) before and 50.6% (n=44 of 87) after the intervention. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess the validity of the HES.

Results

The original factor structure did not fit with our data. We identified a new HES structure with acceptable or good fit indices. The overall internal consistency of our HES structure was considered adequate. Perception of nurses on Relevance of information showed a significant improvement (M=53.19±4.33 vs M=61.03±6.01; p=0.04). Nurses also felt that the timely provision of patient information improved significantly (M=4.50±0.34 vs M=5.16±0.40; p=0.01).

Conclusion

The applied intervention resulted in an improved awareness on the importance of Relevance of information during handovers. After our intervention, the nurses’ perception of the HES item ‘Patient information is provided in a timely manner’ also improved significantly. We are aware that the educational intervention is only the first step to achieve the long-term implementation of a culture of professional communication based on mutual support.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for operating room to intensive care unit handoffs

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the impact of operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoff interventions on process-based and clinical outcomes.

METHOD

We included all English language, prospective evaluation studies of OR to ICU handoff interventions published as original research articles in peer-reviewed journals. The search was conducted on 11 November 2019 on MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, with no prespecified criteria for the type of comparison or outcome. A meta-analysis of similar outcomes was conducted using a random effects model. Quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black (D&B) checklist.

RESULTS

32 studies were included for review. 31 studies were conducted at a single site and 28 studies used an observational study design with a control. Most studies (n=28) evaluated bundled interventions which comprised information transfer/communication checklists and protocols. Meta-analysis showed that the handoff intervention group had statistically significant improvements in time to analgesia dosing (mean difference (MD)=-42.51 min, 95% CI -60.39 to -24.64), fewer information omissions (MD=-2.22, 95% CI -3.68 to -0.77), fewer technical errors (MD=-2.38, 95% CI -4.10 to -0.66) and greater information sharing scores (MD=30.03%, 95% CI 19.67% to 40.40%). Only 15 of the 32 studies scored above 9 points on the modified D&B checklist, indicating a lack of high-quality studies.

DISCUSSION

Bundled interventions were commonly used to support OR to ICU handoff standardisation. Although the meta-analysis showed significant improvements for a number of clinical and process outcomes, the statistical and clinical heterogeneity must be accounted for when interpreting these findings. Implications for OR to ICU handoff practice and future research are discussed.

Implementing receiver-driven handoffs to the emergency department to reduce miscommunication

BACKGROUND

Miscommunications during care transfers are a leading cause of medical errors. Recent consensus-based recommendations to standardise information transfer from outpatient clinics to the emergency department (ED) have not been formally evaluated. We sought to determine whether a receiver-driven structured handoff intervention is associated with 1) increased inclusion of standardised elements; 2) reduced miscommunications and 3) increased perceived quality, safety and efficiency.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective intervention study in a paediatric ED and affiliated clinics in 2016-2018. We developed a bundled handoff intervention included a standard template, receiver training, awareness campaign and iterative feedback. We assessed a random sample of audio-recorded handoffs and associated medical records to measure rates of inclusion of standardised elements and rate of miscommunications. We surveyed key stakeholders pre-intervention and post-intervention to assess perceptions of quality, safety and efficiency of the handoff process.

RESULTS

Across 162 handoffs, implementation of a receiver-driven intervention was associated with significantly increased inclusion of important elements, including illness severity (46% vs 77%), tasks completed (64% vs 83%), expectations (61% vs 76%), pending tests (0% vs 64%), contingency plans (0% vs 54%), detailed callback request (7% vs 81%) and synthesis (2% vs 73%). Miscommunications decreased from 48% to 26%, a relative reduction of 23% (95% CI -39% to -7%). Perceptions of quality (35% vs 59%), safety (43% vs 73%) and efficiency (17% vs 72%) improved significantly post-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a receiver-driven intervention to standardise clinic-to-ED handoffs was associated with improved communication quality. These findings suggest that expanded implementation of similar programmes may significantly improve the care of patients transferred to the paediatric ED.

Going the extra mile - cross-border patient handover in a European border region: qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perspectives

BACKGROUND

Cross-border healthcare is complex, increasingly frequent and causes potential risks for patient safety. In this context, cross-border handovers or the transfer of patients from one country to another deserves particular attention. Although general handover has been the topic of extensive research, little is known about the challenges of handover across national borders, especially as perceived by stakeholders. In this study, we aimed to gain insight into healthcare professionals' perspectives on cross-border handover and ways to support this.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses, paramedics and administrative staff) in a European border region to investigate their perspectives on cross-border handover. The interviews were aimed to investigate settings of acute and planned handover. Informed by the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), interviews focused on participant perspectives. We summarised all interviews and inductively identified healthcare professionals' perspectives. We used elements of the TPB as sensitising concepts.

RESULTS

Forty-three healthcare professionals participated. Although respondents had neutral to positive attitudes, they often did not know very well what was expected of them or what influence they could have on improving cross-border handover. Challenges covered five themes: information transfer, language barriers, task division and education, policy and financial structures and cultural differences. To overcome these challenges, we proposed strategies such as providing tools and protocols, discussing and formalising collaboration, and organising opportunities to meet and get to know each other.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare professionals involved in cross-border handovers face specific challenges. It is necessary to take measures to come to a shared understanding while paying special attention to the above-mentioned challenges. Meeting in person around meaningful activities (eg, training and case discussions) can facilitate sharing ideas and community building.

Critical Communication: A Cross-sectional Study of Signout at the Prehospital and Hospital Interface

Introduction Miscommunication during patient handoff contributes to an estimated 80% of serious medical errors and, consequently, plays a key role in the estimated five million excess deaths annually from poor quality of care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Objective The objective of this study was to assess signout communication during patient handoffs between prehospital personnel and hospital staff. Methods This is a cross-sectional study, with a convenience sample of 931 interfacility transfers for pregnant women across four states from November 7 to December 13, 2016. A complete signout, as defined for this study, contains all necessary signout elements for patient care exchanged verbally or in written form between an emergency medical technician (EMT) and a physician or nurse. Results Enrollment of 786 cases from 931 interfacility transfers resulted in 1572 opportunities for signout. EMTs and a physician or nurse signed out in 1549 cases (98.5%). Signout contained all elements in 135 cases (8.6%). The mean percentage of signout elements included was 45.2% (95% CI, 43.9-46.6). Physician involvement was correlated with a higher mean percent (63.4% [95% CI, 62-64.8]) compared to nurse involvement (23.6% [95% CI, 22.5-24.8]). With respect to the frequency of signout communication, 63.1% of EMTs reported often or always giving signout, and 60.5% reported often or always giving signout; they reported feeling moderately to very comfortable with signout (73.7%) and 34.1% requested further training. Conclusions Physicians, nurses, and the EMTs conducted signout 99% of the time but often fell short of including all elements required for optimal patient care. Interventions aimed at improving the quality of patient care must include strengthening signout communication.

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.

Improving end-of-rotation transitions of care among ICU patients

BACKGROUND

Hospitalised patients whose inpatient teams rotate off service experience increased mortality related to end-of-rotation care transitions, yet standardised handoff practices are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

Develop and implement a multidisciplinary patient-centred handoff intervention to improve outcomes for patients who are critically ill during end-of-rotation transitions.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Single-centre, controlled pilot study of medical intensive care unit (ICU) patients whose resident team was undergoing end-of-rotation transition at a university hospital from June 2017 to February 2018.

INTERVENTION

A 4-item intervention was implemented over two study periods. Intervention 1 included: (1) in-person bedside handoff between teams rotating off and on service, (2) handoff checklist, (3) nursing involvement in handoff, and (4) 30 min education session. Intervention 2 included the additional option to conduct bedside handoff via videoconferencing.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Implementation was measured by repeated clinician surveys and direct observation. Patient outcomes included length of stay (LOS; ICU and hospital) and mortality (ICU, hospital and 30 days). Clinician perceptions were modelled over time using per cent positive responses in logistic regression. Patient outcomes were compared with matched control 'transition' patients from 1 year prior to implementation of the intervention.

RESULTS

Among 270 transition patients, 46.3% were female with a mean age of 55.9 years. Mechanical ventilation (64.1%) and in-hospital death (27.6%) rates were prevalent. Despite high implementation rates-handoff participation (93.8%), checklist utilisation (75.0%), videoconferencing (62.5%), nursing involvement (75.0%)-the intervention did not significantly improve LOS or mortality. Multidisciplinary survey data revealed significant improvement in acceptability by nursing staff, while satisfaction significantly declined for resident physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

In this controlled pilot study, a structured ICU end-of-rotation care transition strategy was feasible to implement with high fidelity. While mortality and LOS were not affected in a pilot study with limited power, the pragmatic strategy of this intervention holds promise for future trials.

Hand-off bundle implementation associated with decreased medical errors and preventable adverse events on an academic family medicine in-patient unit: A pre-post study

To determine the impact of the implementation of a hand-off bundle on medical errors at an inpatient unit of an academic community teaching hospital. Our secondary objective was to determine the research utility of the use of an all-electronic data collection system for medical errors.A retrospective review was conducted of 1290 admissions 6 months before and after implementation of an improved computerized hand-off tool and training bundle. The study took place at an academic community teaching hospital on a Family Medicine inpatient service caring for patients of all ages. The comparison focused on preventable and non-preventable adverse events.A significant decrease in medical errors was noted. Medical error rate dropped from 6.0 (95% CI, 4.2-8.3) to 2.2 (95% CI, 1.2-3.7) per 100 admissions (P < .001). Preventable medical errors dropped from 0.65 (95% CI, 0.18-1.67) to 0.15 (95% CI, 0.03-0.82) per 100 admissions (P = .194). Non-intercepted potential adverse events dropped from 1.30 (95% CI, 0.56-2.57) to 0.44 (95% CI, 0.09-1.30) per 100 admissions (P = .131). Intercepted potential adverse events dropped from 0.98 (95% CI 0.36-2.13) to 0.74 (95% CI 0.24-1.7) per 100 admissions (P = .766) and errors with little potential for harm dropped from 2.77 (95% CI 1.61-4.43) to 0.74 (95% CI 0.24-1.7) per 100 admissions (P = .009).Implementation of a standardized hand-off bundle was associated with a reduction in medical errors despite a low overall event rate. Further studies are warranted to determine the generalizability of this finding, to examine the overall epidemiology of medical errors and the reporting of such events within general medical teaching units.

Improving communication of patient issues on transfer out of intensive care

The written medical handover document is frequently poor in quality and highly variable which raises concerns about patient safety. Intensive care unit (ICU) patients have complex medical and social issues which increases the risk of errors during ongoing hospital treatment. Our project team of four doctors and two nurses aimed to improve the documentation of patient problems as they leave the ICU.

A literature review and process mapping of both medical and nursing transfer documentation helped in understanding the current process. Current problems (CP) were defined as any patient issues which require ongoing thought, management or follow-up.

Our progress was tracked using a measure of the number of CPs listed in the free-text field titled ‘Current Problems’ in 50 medical transfer documents. This was graphed on a control chart showing a process in statistical control. Means and control limits were recalculated whenever a process shift occurred.

There was no relationship between the number of CPs listed and length of ICU stay, age of patient, or severity of illness on presentation (Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation II score). An inter-relationship graph identified the key drivers which were amenable to change: (1) the doctors completing the clinical summary at the time of discharge did not have all the information readily available to them and (2) the doctors were uncertain of the types of problem which should be communicated.

Improvements were designed and trialled using Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to address these two key drivers. At baseline, the average number of CPs per patient was 1.8. After implementation of a paper problem list at the patient bedside, with supporting education, the average increased to 2.7. This was further improved by the addition of a checklist of common patient problems. This increased the average to 3.85.

These improvements were permanently implemented and ongoing audits have shown sustained improvement using statistical process control methods.

Does a multidisciplinary approach have a beneficial effect on the development of a structured patient handover process between acute surgical wards in one of Scotland's largest teaching hospitals?

Background

Effective handover is key in preventing harm.¹ In the Acute Surgical Receiving Unit of Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, large numbers of patients are transferred daily. However, lack of medical handover during transfer means important tasks are missed. Our aim was to understand and reflect on the current system and test changes to improve medical handover.

Aim

Our aim was to ensure that 95% of patients being transferred from the Acute Surgical Receiving Unit receive a basic medical handover within 2 months.

Methods

Initially, we collated issues that were missed when patients were transferred. These data coupled with questionnaire data from members of the team fed into the creation of a handover tool. We proposed to link our tool with the nursing handover, hence creating one unified handover tool. We completed six full Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles (two on communication to aide handover and four on the tool itself) to assess and develop our tool.

Results

By our final PDSA cycle, 84% (33/39) of the patients had a handover, meaning no tasks were missed during transfer. After 4 months, 9 out of 10 staff felt that the introduction of the handover sheet made the handover process smoother and 8 out of 10 felt that the handover sheet improved patient safety and quality of care.

Conclusions

Improving handover can be challenging. However, we have shown that a relatively simple intervention can help promote better practice. Challenges are still present as uptake was only 84%, so work still has to be done to improve this. A wider cultural change involving communication and education would be required to implement this tool more widely.

Improving handover between triage and locality wards in a large mental health trust

Background

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust is the largest mental health trust in the UK, serving four boroughs in South East London. In 2014, the 'triage ward' system was introduced in three boroughs. Similar to an acute medical admission unit, the triage ward would rapidly assess and treat all new admissions. The patients would either be discharged or admitted to a 'locality ward' for further treatment.

Problem

The unforeseen consequences of the 'triage ward' system were duplications and omissions of medical tasks on receiving wards, which affected efficiency and quality of care. This was due to a lack of formal medical handover. We aimed to improve efficiency and patient safety by formalising the junior doctor handover between triage and locality wards, ensuring every patient transferred had a documented handover in their electronic notes.

Method

We consulted our colleagues with a survey, ascertaining their views on the current system, the need for a more formalised system and what form that system should take. Using their feedback, we devised a handover template, to be completed for all patients transferred to locality wards. We then rolled the project out to the other two boroughs using the same methodology.

Results

A follow-up survey showed improvement in our baseline results and that the majority of transferred patients were formally handed over. Serious incident data showed a decrease in incident rates pre-intervention and post-intervention. The intervention was sustained a year later. The transfer of the intervention to other sites was problematic.

Discussion

The project showed the lack of handover was a concern shared by colleagues, and they considered our template a useful way of addressing this. The results suggested that the intervention was sustainable despite frequent rotations of staff. The difficulties in transferring an intervention to new sites are discussed.

Hold-over admissions: are they educational for residents?

PURPOSE

Since implementation of resident duty-hour restrictions, many academic medical centers utilize night-float teams to admit patients during off hours. Patients are transferred to other resident physicians the subsequent morning as "hold-over admissions." Despite the increase of hold-over admissions, there are limited data on resident perceptions of their educational value. This study investigated resident perceptions of hold-over admissions, and whether they approach hold-over admissions differently than new admissions.

METHOD

Survey of internal medicine residents at an academic medical center.

RESULTS

A total of 111 residents responded with a response rate of 71 %. Residents reported spending 56.2 min (standard deviation [SD] 18.9) compared to 80.0 min (SD 25.8) admitting new patients (p < 0.01). Residents reported spending significantly (p < 0.01) less time reviewing the medical record, performing histories, examining patients, devising care plans and writing orders in hold-over admissions compared to new admissions. Residents had neutral views on the educational value of hold-over admissions. Features that significantly (p < 0.01) increased the educational value of admissions included severe illness, patient complexity, and being able to write the initial patient care orders. Residents estimated 42.5 % (SD 14) of their admissions were hold-over patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents spend less time in all aspects of admitting hold-over patients. Despite less time spent admitting hold-over patients, residents had neutral views on the educational value of such admissions.

Effect of a systems intervention on the quality and safety of patient handoffs in an internal medicine residency program

BACKGROUND

Poor quality handoffs have been identified as a major patient safety issue. In residency programs, problematic handoffs may be an unintended consequence of duty-hour restrictions, and key data are frequently omitted from written handoffs because of the lack of standardization of content.

OBJECTIVE

Determine whether an intervention that facilitates face-to-face communication supported by an electronic template improves the quality and safety of handoffs.

DESIGN

Before-after trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-nine interns providing nighttime coverage over 132 intern shifts, representing ∼9,200 handoffs.

INTERVENTIONS

Two interventions were implemented serially-an alteration of the shift model to facilitate face-to-face verbal communication between the primary and nighttime covering physicians and an electronic template for the day-to-night handoff.

MEASUREMENTS

Overall satisfaction and handoff quality were measured using a survey tool administered at the end of each intern shift. Written handoff quality, specifically the documentation of key components, was also assessed before and after the template intervention by study investigators. Interns used the survey tool to report patient safety events related to poor quality handoffs, which were validated by study investigators.

RESULTS

In adjusted analyses comparing intern cohorts with similar levels of training, overall satisfaction with the new handoff processes improved significantly (p < 0.001) post intervention. Verbal handoff quality (4/10 measures) and written handoff quality (5/6 measures) also improved significantly. Study investigators also found significant improvement in documentation of key components in the written handoff. Interns reported significantly fewer reported data omissions (p = 0.001) and a non-significant reduction in near misses (p = 0.056), but no significant difference in adverse events (p = 0.41) post intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Redesign of shift models common in residency programs to minimize the number of handoffs and facilitate face-to-face communication, along with implementation of electronic handoff templates, improves the quality of handoffs in a learning environment.

Medication discrepancies in resident sign-outs and their potential to harm

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of information transferred during hand-offs is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the frequency, types, and harm potential of medication discrepancies in resident-written sign-outs.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Internal Medicine interns and their patients at a single hospital in January 2006.

MEASUREMENTS

Daily written sign-outs were compared to daily medication lists in patient charts (gold standard). Medication discrepancies were labeled omissions (medication in chart, but not on sign-out) or commissions (medication on sign-out, but not in chart). Discrepancies were also classified as index errors (the first time an error was made) and the proportion of index errors that persisted on subsequent days. Using a modified classification scheme, discrepancies were rated as having minimal, moderate, or severe potential to harm.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-six of 247 (75%) patients and 10 of 10(100%) interns consented. In the 165 (89%) patients' charts abstracted and compared with the sign-out, there were 1,876 of 6,942 (27%) medication chart entries that were discrepant with the sign-out with 80% (1,490/1,876) labeled omissions. These discrepancies originated from 758 index errors, of which 63% (481) persisted past the first day. Omissions were more likely to persist than commissions (68% [382 of 580] vs 53% [99 of 188], p < .001). Greater than half (54%) of index discrepancies were moderate or severely harmful. Although omissions were more frequent, commissions were more likely to be severely harmful (38% [72 of 188] vs 11% [65 of 580], p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Written sign-outs contain potentially harmful medication discrepancies. Whereas linking sign-outs to electronic medical records can address this problem, current efforts should also emphasize the importance of vigilant updating in the many hospitals without this technology.