Signout

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:手术移交与护理失败的重大风险相关。现有的研究显示出方法上的缺陷,并且在评估该领域干预措施的结果上几乎没有共识。本文报告了开发核心结果集(COS)以支持标准化的协议,可比性,以及未来医生之间手术交接研究的证据综合。
    方法:本研究遵循COS开发有效性试验中的核心结果指标(COMET)倡议指南,包括COS-发展标准(COS-STAD)和报告(COS-STAR)建议。它已在COMET数据库中进行了前瞻性注册,并将由包括外科医疗保健专业人员在内的国际指导小组领导。研究人员,耐心和公共伙伴。通过对改善手术交接的干预措施进行系统评价,生成报告结果的初始列表(PROSPERO:CRD42022363198)。患者和公众对移交观点的定性证据综合结果将增加此列表,随后是涉及所有利益相关者团体的实时Delphi调查。然后,每位Delphi参与者将被邀请参加至少一次在线共识会议,以最终确定COS。
    背景:这项研究得到了爱尔兰皇家外科医学院(RCSI)研究伦理委员会的批准(202309015,2023年11月7日)。结果将在外科科学会议上发表,并提交给同行评审的期刊。一个简单的英文摘要将通过国家网站和社交媒体传播。作者旨在将COS纳入爱尔兰国家外科培训机构的移交课程,并确保其与其他研究生外科培训计划在国际上共享。将鼓励合作者与相关的国家卫生服务职能和国家机构分享调查结果。
    结论:这项研究将代表首次发表的COS干预措施,以改善手术交接,在外科背景下首次使用实时德尔菲调查,并将支持生成更高质量的证据,以告知最佳实践。
    背景:有效性试验(COMET)倡议2675的核心结果指标。http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2675。
    BACKGROUND: Surgical handover is associated with a significant risk of care failures. Existing research displays methodological deficiencies and little consensus on the outcomes that should be used to evaluate interventions in this area. This paper reports a protocol to develop a core outcome set (COS) to support standardisation, comparability, and evidence synthesis in future studies of surgical handover between doctors.
    METHODS: This study adheres to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative guidance for COS development, including the COS-Standards for Development (COS-STAD) and Reporting (COS-STAR) recommendations. It has been registered prospectively on the COMET database and will be led by an international steering group that includes surgical healthcare professionals, researchers, and patient and public partners. An initial list of reported outcomes was generated through a systematic review of interventions to improve surgical handover (PROSPERO: CRD42022363198). Findings of a qualitative evidence synthesis of patient and public perspectives on handover will augment this list, followed by a real-time Delphi survey involving all stakeholder groups. Each Delphi participant will then be invited to take part in at least one online consensus meeting to finalise the COS.
    BACKGROUND: This study was approved by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) Research Ethics Committee (202309015, 7th November 2023). Results will be presented at surgical scientific meetings and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. A plain English summary will be disseminated through national websites and social media. The authors aim to integrate the COS into the handover curriculum of the Irish national surgical training body and ensure it is shared internationally with other postgraduate surgical training programmes. Collaborators will be encouraged to share the findings with relevant national health service functions and national bodies.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study will represent the first published COS for interventions to improve surgical handover, the first use of a real-time Delphi survey in a surgical context, and will support the generation of better-quality evidence to inform best practice.
    BACKGROUND: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative 2675.  http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2675 .
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    The handover period has been identified as a particularly vulnerable period for communication breakdown leading to patient safety events. Clear and concise handover is especially critical in high-acuity care settings such as trauma, emergency general surgery, and surgical critical care. There is no consensus for the most effective and efficient means of evaluating or performing handover in this population. We aimed to characterize the current handover practices and perceptions in trauma and acute care surgery.
    A survey was sent to 2265 members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma via email regarding handoff practices at their institution. Respondents were queried regarding their practice setting, average census, level of trauma center, and patients (trauma, emergency general surgery, and/or intensive care). Data regarding handover practices were gathered including frequency of handover, attendees, duration, timing, and formality. Finally, perceptions of handover including provider satisfaction, desire for improvement, and effectiveness were collected.
    Three hundred eighty surveys (17.1%) were completed. The majority (73.4%) of respondents practiced at level 1 trauma centers (58.9%) and were trauma/emergency general surgeons (86.5%). Thirty-five percent of respondents reported a formalized handover and 52% used a standardized tool for handover. Only 18% of respondents had ever received formal training, but most (51.6%) thought this training would be helpful. Eighty-one percent of all providers felt handover was essential for patient care, and 77% felt it prevented harm. Seventy-two percent thought their handover practice needed improvement, and this was more common as the average patient census increased. The most common suggestions for improvement were shorter and more concise handover (41.6%), different handover medium (24.5%), and adding verbal communication (13.9%).
    Trauma and emergency general surgeons perceive handover as essential for patient care and the majority desire improvement of their current handover practices. Methods identified to improve the handover process include standardization, simplification, and verbal interaction, which allows for shared understanding. Formal education and best practice guidelines should be developed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Continuity is critical for safe patient care and its absence is associated with adverse outcomes. Continuity requires handoffs between physicians, but most published studies of educational interventions to improve handoffs have focused primarily on residents, despite interns expected to being proficient. The AAMC core entrustable activities for graduating medical students includes handoffs as a milestone, but no controlled studies with students have assessed the impact of training in handoff skills. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of an educational intervention to improve third-year medical student handoff skills, the durability of learned skills into the fourth year, and the transfer of skills from the simulated setting to the clinical environment. Trained evaluators used standardized patient cases and an observation tool to assess verbal handoff skills immediately post intervention and during the student\'s fourth-year acting internship. Students were also observed doing real time sign-outs during their acting internship. Evaluators assessed untrained control students using a standardized case and performing a real-time sign-out. Intervention students mean score demonstrated improvement in handoff skills immediately after the workshop (2.6-3.8; p < 0.0001) that persisted into their fourth year acting internship when compared to baseline performance (3.9-3.5; p = 0.06) and to untrained control students (3.5 vs. 2.5; p < 0.001, d = 1.2). Intervention students evaluated in the clinical setting also scored higher than control students when assessed doing real-time handoffs (3.8 vs. 3.3; p = 0.032, d = 0.71). These findings should be useful to others considering introducing handoff teaching in the undergraduate medical curriculum in preparation for post-graduate medical training. Trial Registration Number NCT02217241.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号