Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 19;13(4):e0195216. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195216. eCollection 2018.
The effect of a multi-faceted handoff strategy in a high volume internal medicine inpatient setting on process and patient outcomes has not been clearly established. We set out to determine if a multi-faceted handoff intervention consisting of education, standardized handoff procedures, including fixed time and location for face-to-face handoff would result in improved rates of handoff compared with usual practice. We also evaluated resident satisfaction, health resource utilization and clinical outcomes.
This was a cluster randomized controlled trial in a large academic tertiary care center with 18 inpatient internal medicine ward teams from January-April 2013. We randomized nine inpatient teams to an intervention where they received an education session standardizing who and how to handoff patients, with practice and feedback from facilitators. The control group of 9 teams continued usual non-standardized handoffs. The primary process outcome was the rate of patients handed over per 1000 patient nights. Other process outcomes included perceptions of inadequate handoff by overnight physicians, resource utilization overnight and hospital length of stay. Clinical outcomes included medical errors, frequency of patients requiring higher level of care overnight, and in-hospital mortality.
The intervention group demonstrated a significant increase in the rate of patients handed over to the overnight physician (62.90/1000 person-nights vs. 46.86/1000 person-nights, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in other process outcomes except resource utilization was increased in the intervention group (26.35/1000 person-days vs. 17.57/1000 person-days, p-value = 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in medical errors (4.8% vs. 4.1%), need for higher level of care or in hospital mortality. Limitations include a dependence of accurate record keeping by the overnight physician, the possibility of cross-contamination in the handoff process, analysis at the cluster level and an overall low number of clinical events.
Implementation of a multi-faceted resident handoff intervention did not result in a significant improvement in patient safety although did improve number of patients handed off. Novel methods to improve handoff need to be explored.
Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01796756.
在高容量的内科住院环境中,多方面的交接策略对过程和患者结局的影响尚不清楚。我们着手确定一种多方面的交接干预措施,包括教育、标准化交接程序,包括固定的面对面交接时间和地点,是否会与常规实践相比,提高交接率。我们还评估了住院医师的满意度、卫生资源利用和临床结果。
这是一项在大型学术型三级保健中心进行的集群随机对照试验,共有 18 个内科住院病房团队参与,时间为 2013 年 1 月至 4 月。我们将 9 个住院团队随机分配到干预组,该组接受了一次教育课程,内容是标准化交接患者的人员和方法,并由促进者进行实践和反馈。对照组的 9 个团队继续进行非标准化的常规交接。主要的过程结果是每 1000 个患者夜交接的患者数量。其他过程结果包括夜间医生认为交接不充分的比例、夜间资源利用和住院时间。临床结果包括医疗错误、夜间需要更高水平护理的患者频率以及住院死亡率。
干预组夜间医生交接的患者数量显著增加(62.90/1000 人夜vs.46.86/1000 人夜,p=0.002)。除资源利用增加外,其他过程结果没有显著差异(干预组 26.35/1000 人天vs.17.57/1000 人天,p 值=0.01)。两组间医疗错误(4.8%vs.4.1%)、需要更高水平的护理或住院死亡率无显著差异。局限性包括对夜间医生准确记录的依赖、交接过程中交叉污染的可能性、集群水平的分析以及总体临床事件数量较少。
尽管实施多方面的住院医师交接干预措施确实提高了交接患者的数量,但并未显著改善患者安全。需要探索新的方法来改进交接。
ClinicalTrials.gov 注册:NCT01796756。