Dataset Information

"Our Hands Are Tied Until Your Doctor Gets Here": Nursing Perspectives on Inter-hospital Transfers.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The transfer of patients between hospitals (inter-hospital transfer, or IHT) is a common occurrence for patients, but guidelines to ensure safe and effective IHTs are lacking. Poor IHTs result in higher rates of mortality, longer lengths of stay, and higher hospitalization costs compared to admissions from the emergency department. Nurses are often the first point of contact for IHT patients and can provide valuable insights on key challenges to IHT processes.

Objective

To characterize the experiences of inpatient floor-level bedside nurses caring for IHT patients and identify care coordination challenges and solutions.

Design/participants/approach

Qualitative study using semi-structured focus groups and interviews conducted from October 2019 to July 2020 with 21 inpatient floor-level nurses caring for adult medicine patients at an academic hospital. Nurses were recruited using a purposive convenience sampling approach. A combined inductive and deductive coding approach guided by thematic analysis was used for data analysis.

Key results

Results from this study are mapped to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Care Coordination Measurement Framework domains of communication, assessing needs and goals, and negotiating accountability. The following key themes characterize nurses' experiences with IHT related to these domains: (1) challenges with information exchange and team communication during IHT, (2) environmental and information preparation needed to anticipate transfers, and (3) determining responsibility and care plans after the IHT patient has arrived at the accepting facility.

Conclusions

Nurses described the absence of standardized processes to coordinate care before or at the time of patient arrival. Challenges to communication and coordination during IHTs negatively impacted patient care and nursing professional satisfaction. To streamline care for IHT patients and reduce nursing stress, future IHT interventions should include standardized handoff reports, timely identification and easy access to admitting clinicians, and timely clinician evaluation and orders.

SUBMITTER: Yu A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8735724 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Research demonstrates that the placebo effect can influence the effectiveness of medical treatments and accounts for a significant proportion of healing in many conditions. However, providers may differ in the degree to which they consciously or unconsciously leverage the forces that produce placebo effects in clinical practice. Some studies suggest that the manner in which providers interact with patients shapes the magnitude of placebo effects, but this research has yet to distill the specific dimensions of patient-provider interactions that are most likely to influence placebo response and the mechanisms through which aspects of patient-provider interactions impact placebo response. Methods: We offer a simplifying and unifying framework in which interactions that boost placebo response can be dissected into two key dimensions: patients' perceptions of competence, or whether a doctor "gets it" (i.e., displays of efficiency, knowledge, and skill), and patients' perceptions of warmth, or whether a doctor "gets me" (i.e., displays of personal engagement, connection, and care for the patient). Results: First, we discuss how this framework builds on past research in psychology on social perception of competence and warmth and in medical literature on models of effective medical care, patient satisfaction, and patient-provider interactions. Then we consider possible mechanisms through which competence and warmth may affect the placebo response in healthcare. Finally, we share original data from patients and providers highlighting how this framework applies to healthcare. Both patient and provider data illustrate actionable ways providers can demonstrate competence and warmth to patients. Discussion: We conclude with recommendations for how researchers and practitioners alike can more systematically consider the role of provider competence and warmth in patient-provider interactions to deepen our understanding of placebo effects and, ultimately, enable providers to boost placebo effects alongside active medications (i.e., with known medical ingredients) and treatment in clinical care.

Project description:BackgroundVisits in emergency departments and hospital admissions are common among nursing home (NH) residents and they are associated with significant complications. Many of these transfers are considered inappropriate. This study aimed to compare the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) and NH staff on hospital transfers among residents and to illustrate measures for improvement.MethodsTwo cross-sectional studies were conducted as surveys among 1121 GPs in the German federal states Bremen and Lower Saxony and staff from 1069 NHs (preferably nursing staff managers) from all over Germany, each randomly selected. Questionnaires were sent in August 2018 and January 2019, respectively. The answers were compared between GPs and NH staff using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests and ?2-tests.ResultsWe received 375 GP questionnaires (response: 34%) and 486 NH questionnaires (response: 45%). GPs estimated the proportion of inappropriate transfers higher than NH staff (hospital admissions: 35.0% vs. 25.6%, p?<?0.0001; emergency department visits: 39.9% vs. 20.9%, p?<?0.0001). The majority of NH staff and nearly half of the GPs agreed that NH residents do often not benefit from hospital admissions (NHs: 61.4% vs. GPs: 48.8%; p?=?0.0009). Both groups rated almost all potential measures for improvement differently (p?<?0.0001), however, GPs and NH staff considered most areas to reduce hospital transfers importantly. The two most important measures for GPs were more nursing staff (91.6%) and better communication between nursing staff and GP (90.9%). NH staff considered better care / availability of GP (82.8%) and medical specialists (81.3%) as most important. Both groups rated similarly the importance of explicit advance directives (GPs: 77.2%, NHs: 72.4%; p?=?0.1492).ConclusionsA substantial proportion of hospital transfers from NHs were considered inappropriate. Partly, the ratings of possible areas for improvement differed between GPs and NH staff indicating that both groups seem to pass the responsibility to each other. These findings, however, support the need for interprofessional collaboration.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to determine the--largely unexplored--extent of systematic variation in the work disability assessment by Dutch insurance physicians (IPs) of employees on long-term sick leave, and to ascertain whether this variation was associated with the individual characteristics and opinions of IPs.MethodsIn March 2008 we conducted a survey among IPs on the basis of the 'Attitude--Social norm--self-Efficacy' (ASE) model. We used the ensuing data to form latent variables for the ASE constructs. We then linked the background variables and the measured constructs for IPs (n = 199) working at regional offices (n = 27) to the work disability assessments of clients (n = 83,755) and their characteristics. These assessments were carried out between July 2003 and April 2008. We performed multilevel regression analysis on three important assessment outcomes: No Sustainable Capacity or Restrictions for Working Hours (binominal), Functional Incapacity Score (scale 0-6) and Maximum Work Disability Class (binominal). We calculated Intra Class Correlations (ICCs) at IP level and office level and explained variances (R2) for the three outcomes. A higher ICC reflects stronger systematic variation.ResultsThe ICCs at IP level were approximately 6% for No Sustainable Capacity or Restrictions for Working Hours and Maximum Work Disability Class and 12% for Functional Incapacity Score. Background IP variables and the measured ASE constructs for physicians contributed very little to the variation--at most 1%. The ICCs at office level ranged from 0% to around 1%. The R2 was 11% for No Sustainable Capacity or Restrictions for Working Hours, 19% for Functional Incapacity Score and 37% for Maximum Work Disability Class.ConclusionOur study uncovered small to moderate systematic variations in the outcome of disability assessments in the Netherlands. However, the individual characteristics and opinions of insurance physicians have very little impact on these variations. Our findings provided no indications of other reasons for these variations. They may be related to different work routines or to different views on the workload of a 'normal' employee. If so, they could be reduced by well-developed and comprehensively implemented guidelines. Therefore, further research is needed.

Project description:ObjectiveTo provide a case report of barriers and promoters to implementing a health information exchange (HIE) tool that supports patient transfers between hospitals and skilled nursing facilities.MethodsA multi-disciplinary team conducted semi-structured telephone and in-person interviews in a purposive sample of HIE organizational informants and providers in New York City who implemented HIE to share patient transfer information. The researchers conducted grounded theory analysis to identify themes of barriers and promoters and took steps to improve the trustworthiness of the results including vetting from a knowledgeable study participant.ResultsBetween May and October 2011, researchers recruited 18 participants: informaticians, healthcare administrators, software engineers, and providers from a skilled nursing facility. Subjects perceived the HIE tool's development a success in that it brought together stakeholders who had traditionally not partnered for informatics work, and that they could successfully share patient transfer information between a hospital and a skilled nursing facility. Perceived barriers included lack of hospital stakeholder buy-in and misalignment with clinical workflows that inhibited use of HIE-based patient transfer data. Participants described barriers and promoters in themes related to organizational, technical, and user-oriented issues. The investigation revealed that stakeholders could develop and implement health information technology that technically enables clinicians in both hospitals and skilled nursing facilities to exchange real-time information in support of patient transfers. User level barriers, particularly in the emergency department, should give pause to developers and implementers who plan to use HIE in support of patient transfers.ConclusionsParticipants' experiences demonstrate how stakeholders may succeed in developing and piloting an electronic transfer form that relies on HIE to aggregate, communicate, and display relevant patient transfer data across health care organizations. Their experiences also provide insights for others seeking to develop HIE applications to improve patient transfers between emergency departments and skilled nursing facilities.