End-of-shift surgical handover: mixed-methods, multicentre evaluation and recommendations for improvement.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ryan JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10989866 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
End-of-shift surgical handover: mixed-methods, multicentre evaluation and recommendations for improvement.
Ryan Jessica M JM Simiceva Anastasija A Eppich Walter W Kavanagh Dara O DO McNamara Deborah A DA
BJS open 20240301 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionBeyond the provision of services, quality of care and patient safety measures such as optimal clinical handover at shift changes determine maternity outcomes. We aimed to establish the proportion of women handed over and the content of clinical handovers and communication between shifts within 3 diverse obstetrics units in Kerala, India, and to describe the handover environment.MethodsA cross sectional study was conducted for six weeks during February and March 2015at three hospitals in Kerala, India, during nurses obstetric handover in one tertiary private, one tertiary government and one secondary government hospital. Nursing handovers in obstetric post-operative, in-patient and labour wards were sampled. An SBAR-based (situation, background, assessment and recommendation) data schedule was completed whilst observing handover at nursing shift changes. Since obstetricians had no scheduled handover, qualitative interviews were conducted with obstetricians in two hospitals to establish how they acquire information when beginning a shift.ResultsData was obtained on 258 patients handed over, within 67 shift changes. The median percentage of women handed over was 100% in two of the hospitals and 27.6% in the other. The median number of information items included out of a possible 25 was 11, 5 and 4,and did not change significantly for women with high-risk status. Important items regarding assessment and recommendation for care were often missed, including high-risk status. The median number of environment items achieved was good at 7 out of 10 in all hospitals. Obstetricians sought information in various ways when required. All supported the development of structured tools, face-to-face and team handovers.ConclusionsMaternity unit handovers for doctors and nurses were inadequate. Ensuring handover of all women and including critical information, between shifts as well as between doctors, needs to be improved to increase patient safety.
| S-EPMC9098034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Clinical handover is a vital communication process for patient safety; transferring patient responsibility between healthcare professionals (HCPs). Exploring handover processes in maternity care is fundamental for service quality, addressing continuity of care and maternal mortality. Methods This mixed-methods study was conducted in all three maternity hospitals in Banjul, The Gambia. Shift-to-shift maternity handovers were observed and compared against a standard investigating content and environment. Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with doctors, midwives and nurses explored handover experience. Results One hundred ten nurse/midwife shift-to-shift handovers were observed across all shift times and maternity wards; only 666 of 845 women (79%) were handed over. Doctors had no scheduled handover. Shift-leads alone gave/received handover, delayed [median 35 min, IQR 24–45] 82% of the time; 96% of handovers were not confidential and 29% were disrupted. Standardised guidelines and training were lacking. A median 6 of 28 topics [IQR 5–9] were communicated per woman. Information varied significantly by time, high-risk classification and location. For women in labour, 10 [IQR 8–14] items were handed-over, 8 [IQR 5–11] for women classed ‘high-risk’, 5 [IQR 4–7] for ante/postnatal women (p < 0.001); > 50% had no care management plan communicated. Twenty-one interviews and two focus groups were conducted. Facilitators and barriers to effective handover surrounding three health service factors emerged; health systems (e.g. absence of formalised handover training), organisation culture (e.g. absence of multidisciplinary team handover) and individual clinician factors (e.g. practical barriers such as transportation difficulties in getting to work). Conclusion Maternity handover was inconsistent, hindered by contextual barriers including lack of team communication and guidelines, delays, with some women omitted entirely. Findings alongside HCPs views demonstrate feasible opportunities for enhancing handover, thereby improving women's safety. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-022-05052-9.
| S-EPMC9587588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Effective handovers are vital to patient safety and continuity of care, and this is recognised by several national bodies including the GMC. The existing model at Great Western Hospital (GWH) involved three general surgical teams and a urology team placing their printed patient lists, complete with weekend jobs, in a folder for the on-call team to collect at the weekend. We recognised a need to reduce time searching for patients, jobs and reviews, and to streamline weekend ward rounds. A unified weekend list ordering all surgical patients by ward and bed number was introduced. Discrepancies in the layout of each team's weekday list necessitated the design of a new weekday list to match the weekend list to facilitate the easy transfer of information between the two lists. A colour coding system was also used to highlight specific jobs. Prior to this improvement project only 7.1% of those polled were satisfied with the existing system, after a series of interventions satisfaction increased to 85.7%. The significant increase in overall satisfaction with surgical handover following the introduction of the unified weekend list is promising. Locating patients and identifying jobs is easier and weekend ward rounds can conducted in a more logical and timely fashion. It has also helped facilitate the transition to consultant ward rounds of all surgical inpatients at the weekends with promising feedback from a recent consultants meeting.
| S-EPMC4645894 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aims to quantitatively assess use of the NSQIP surgical risk calculator (NSRC) in contemporary surgical practice and to identify barriers to use and potential interventions that might increase use.Materials and methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study of surgeons at seven institutions. The primary outcomes were self-reported application of the calculator in general clinical practice and specific clinical scenarios as well as reported barriers to use.ResultsIn our sample of 99 surgeons (49.7% response rate), 73.7% reported use of the NSRC in the past month. Approximately half (51.9%) of respondents reported infrequent NSRC use (<20% of preoperative discussions), while 14.3% used it in ≥40% of preoperative assessments. Reported use was higher in nonelective cases (30.2% vs 11.1%) and in patients who were ≥65 years old (37.1% vs 13.0%), functionally dependent (41.2% vs 6.6%), or with surrogate consent (39.9% vs 20.4%). NSRC use was not associated with training status or years in practice. Respondents identified a lack of influence on the decision to pursue surgery as well as concerns regarding the calculator's accuracy as barriers to use. Surgeons suggested improving integration to workflow and better education as strategies to increase NSRC use.ConclusionsMany surgeons reported use of the NSRC, but few used it frequently. Surgeons reported more frequent use in nonelective cases and frail patients, suggesting the calculator is of greater utility for high-risk patients. Surgeons raised concerns about perceived accuracy and suggested additional education as well as integration of the calculator into the electronic health record.
| S-EPMC10373440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Given that an estimated 0.6% of the U.S. population is transgender (trans) and that large health disparities for this population have been documented, government and research organizations are increasingly expanding measures of sex/gender to be trans inclusive. Options suggested for trans community surveys, such as expansive check-all-that-apply gender identity lists and write-in options that offer maximum flexibility, are generally not appropriate for broad population surveys. These require limited questions and a small number of categories for analysis. Limited evaluation has been undertaken of trans-inclusive population survey measures for sex/gender, including those currently in use. Using an internet survey and follow-up of 311 participants, and cognitive interviews from a maximum-diversity sub-sample (n = 79), we conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of two existing measures: a two-step question developed in the United States and a multidimensional measure developed in Canada. We found very low levels of item missingness, and no indicators of confusion on the part of cisgender (non-trans) participants for both measures. However, a majority of interview participants indicated problems with each question item set. Agreement between the two measures in assessment of gender identity was very high (K = 0.9081), but gender identity was a poor proxy for other dimensions of sex or gender among trans participants. Issues to inform measure development or adaptation that emerged from analysis included dimensions of sex/gender measured, whether non-binary identities were trans, Indigenous and cultural identities, proxy reporting, temporality concerns, and the inability of a single item to provide a valid measure of sex/gender. Based on this evaluation, we recommend that population surveys meant for multi-purpose analysis consider a new Multidimensional Sex/Gender Measure for testing that includes three simple items (one asked only of a small sub-group) to assess gender identity and lived gender, with optional additions. We provide considerations for adaptation of this measure to different contexts.
| S-EPMC5444783 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn this study, we developed online interactive clinician education modules highlighting best practices to minimize opioid prescribing at discharge after surgery. The modules were implemented as part of a multicomponent quality improvement initiative across a six-hospital health system. This article describes the development and evaluation of this educational intervention.Materials and methodsClinician education modules targeting surgical prescribers, nurses, and pharmacists were developed and implemented by an interdisciplinary team. Clinicians were invited to participate in an evaluation survey after completing the modules. Survey items assessed clinicians' rating of the module and intention to change clinical practice because of the module. Quantitative and qualitative survey responses were analyzed by the study team.ResultsA total of 2119 clinicians completed the module and 1831 of these clinicians (86.4%) completed the survey. Of clinicians completing the survey, 65.6% reported that they intend to change clinical practice after completing the module. Intended changes were related to increased knowledge and awareness, provider empowerment, opioid prescribing practices, nonopioid prescribing practices, and patient education. Many clinicians who indicated they do not intend to change practice reported that their clinical practices were already in line with module recommendations. Some clinicians did not perceive the module to be relevant to their role.ConclusionsModule completion was associated with the intention to improve clinical practice in areas related to provider empowerment, opioid prescribing, nonopioid prescribing, and patient education. Evaluation data will inform future module improvements. There is an opportunity to ensure that all clinicians, including those who are not prescribers, recognize their role in opioid stewardship.
| S-EPMC7736366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPreoperative medical consultations add expense and burden for patients and the impact of these consults on patient outcomes is conflicting. Previous work suggests that 10-40% of preoperative medical consult recommendations are not followed. This limits measurement of the effect of perioperative medical consultation on patient outcomes and represents a quality gap, given the patient time and healthcare cost associated with consultation. We aimed to measure, characterize, and understand reasons for missed recommendations from preoperative medical consultation.MethodsThis explanatory, sequential mixed-methods study used chart audits followed by semi-structured interviews. Chart audit of consecutive patients seen in preoperative medical clinic were reviewed to measure the proportion and characterize the type of recommendations that were not completed ("missed"). This phase informed the interview participants and questions. The interview guide was developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Template analysis was used to understand drivers and barriers of missed recommendations RESULTS: Chart audit included 255 patients (n=161, 63.1% female) seen in preadmission clinic between April 1 and April 30, 2019. 55.7% of patients had all recommendations followed (n=142). Postoperative anticoagulation management and postoperative cardiac biomarker surveillance recommendations were least commonly followed (50.0%, n=28, and 68.9%, n=82, respectively). Eighteen surgical team members were interviewed. Missed recommendations were both unintentional and intentional, and the key drivers differed by these categories. Unintentionally missed recommendations occurred due to individual-level factors (drivers: knowledge of the consultation note, lack of routine for reviewing the consultation note, and competing demands on time) and systems-level factors (driver: lack of role clarity). Intentionally missed recommendations occurred due to user error due (drivers: lack of knowledge of guidelines or evidence) and appropriate modifications (driver: need to adapt a preoperative plan for a complicated postoperative course).ConclusionsOnly 55.7% of consult notes had all recommendations followed, suggesting a quality gap in perioperative medical care. Qualitative data suggests multiple drivers of missed recommendations that should be targeted to improve the efficiency of care for these patients.
| S-EPMC8805252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNearly 20% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients present with potentially incurable (Stage IV) disease, yet their physicians do not integrate cancer treatment with palliative care. Compared with patients treated by primary providers, surgical patients with terminal diseases are significantly less likely to receive palliative or end-of-life care.ObjectiveTo describe surgeon perspectives on palliative and end-of-life care for patients with Stage IV CRCs.DesignThis is a convergent mixed methods study using a validated survey instrument from the Critical Care Peer Workgroup of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Promoting Excellence in End-of-Life Care Project with additional qualitative questions.SettingsParticipants were all current, nonretired members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.Main outcome measuresSurgeon-perceived barriers to palliative and end-of-life care for patients with Stage IV CRCs were identified.ResultsAmong 131 Internet survey respondents (response rate 16.5%), 76.1% reported no formal education in palliative care, and specifically noted inadequate training in techniques to forgo life-sustaining measures (37.9%) and communication (42.7%). Over half (61.8%) of surgeons cited unrealistic expectations among patients and families as a barrier to care, which also limited discussion of palliation. At the system level, absence of documentation, appropriate processes, and culture hindered the initiation of palliative care. Thematic analysis of open-ended questions confirmed and extended these findings through the following major barriers to palliative and end-of-life care: (1) surgeon knowledge and training; (2) communication challenges; (3) difficulty with prognostication; (4) patient and family factors encompassing unrealistic expectations and discordant preferences; and (5) systemic issues including culture and lack of documentation and appropriate resources.LimitationsGeneralizability is limited by the small sample size inherent to Internet surveys, which may contribute to selection bias.ConclusionsSurgeons valued palliative and end-of-life care but reported multilevel barriers to its provision. These data will inform strategies to reduce these perceived barriers.
| S-EPMC6909736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCurrent medical education models increasingly rely on longitudinal assessments to document learner progress over time. This longitudinal focus has re-kindled discussion regarding learner handover-where assessments are shared across supervisors, rotations, and educational phases, to support learner growth and ease transitions. The authors explored the opinions of, experiences with, and recommendations for successful implementation of learner handover among clinical supervisors.MethodsClinical supervisors from five postgraduate medical education programs at one institution completed an online questionnaire exploring their views regarding learner handover, specifically: potential benefits, risks, and suggestions for implementation. Survey items included open-ended and numerical responses. The authors used an inductive content analysis approach to analyze the open-ended questionnaire responses, and descriptive and correlational analyses for numerical data.ResultsSeventy-two participants completed the questionnaire. Their perspectives varied widely. Suggested benefits of learner handover included tailored learning, improved assessments, and enhanced patient safety. The main reported risk was the potential for learner handover to bias supervisors' perceptions of learners, thereby affecting the validity of future assessments and influencing the learner's educational opportunities and well-being. Participants' suggestions for implementation focused on who should be involved, when and for whom it should occur, and the content that should be shared.DiscussionThe diverse opinions of, and recommendations for, learner handover highlight the necessity for handover to maximize learning potential while minimizing potential harms. Supervisors' suggestions for handover implementation reveal tensions between assessment-of and for-learning.
| S-EPMC7550510 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesResearch 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsAlmost 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.ConclusionsDeficiencies 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.
| S-EPMC6281223 | biostudies-literature