Literature DB >> 25738805

Distractions during resident handoffs: incidence, sources, and influence on handoff quality and effectiveness.

Cristan E Anderson1, Grace A Nicksa1, Lygia Stewart1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Handoffs have significantly increased in number following Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) work-hour restrictions. Studies have shown correlations between the number of handoffs and errors/patient harm. Distractions are common during handoffs and may interfere with handoff quality and effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency of distractions and their impact on handoff quality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this prospective observational study, a total of 214 surgical resident handoffs (residents = 184; Bay area residents [moonlighters] = 30) were observed over 18 months (July 11, 2012-December 19, 2014) by 2 independent observers in 3 teaching hospitals (university, county, and veterans). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Handoff quality (both giver and receiver) was assessed using a standardized scoring system. The number and types of distractions were recorded.
RESULTS: Pages were the most common distraction (37.5%), followed by telephone calls (32.8%), residents/medical students (9.3%), talking (5.2%), and noise (4.1%). Distractions from attending physicians, electronics, nursing, consults, and room changes were less common (collectively 11%, each <3%). Distractions were present in 102 resident handoffs (48%) (16% with 1 distraction; 15% with 2; 6% with 3, and 11% with ≥4). Distractions occurred in 54% of junior resident handoffs (mean, 1.4/handoff), 30% of moonlighter handoffs (mean, 0.5/handoff), and 38% of senior resident handoffs (mean, 0.89/handoff) (P = .01, junior vs moonlighter/senior). Distractions were more common during evening than morning handoffs (52% vs 36%; P = .045) and during team vs individual handoffs (58% vs 44%; P < .10). Handoffs without distractions were shorter in length (13.2 minutes without distractions vs 21.5 minutes with distractions; P < .001) and minutes per patient (1.78 without vs 2.15 with distractions; P = .04). Handoff quality was not diminished by distractions, as measured by handoff giver score (15.41 without vs 15.47 with distractions; P = .90) and receiver score (7.42 without vs 7.25 with distractions; P = .45). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: To our knowledge, this is the largest study of distractions during surgical resident handoffs. Distractions were very common during handoffs; they were more common in the evening when junior residents more commonly performed the handoff and they increased the handoff length. However, distractions did not negatively affect the quality of resident handoffs. This may demonstrate the resilience of surgical residents to distractions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25738805     DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   14.766


  6 in total

1.  Communication: Is There a Standard Handover Technique to Transfer Patient Care?

Authors:  Emily Methangkool; Luis Tollinche; Jamie Sparling; Aalok V Agarwala
Journal:  Int Anesthesiol Clin       Date:  2019

2.  Quality of Handoffs in Community Pharmacies.

Authors:  Ephrem Abebe; Jamie A Stone; Corey A Lester; Michelle A Chui
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 2.243

3.  Identifying temporal patterns in trauma admissions: Informing resource allocation.

Authors:  David P Stonko; Bradley M Dennis; Rachael A Callcut; Richard D Betzold; Michael C Smith; Andrew J Medvecz; Oscar D Guillamondegui
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.240

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

Authors:  Vilmaris Quinones Cardona; Alison LaBadie; David B Cooperberg; Alan Zubrow; Suzanne M Touch
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2021-01

5.  How does training in anesthesia residency shape residents' approaches to patient care handoffs? A single-center qualitative interview study.

Authors:  Madhavi Muralidharan; Justin T Clapp; Bridget Perrin Pulos; Sushmitha P Diraviam; Dimitry Y Baranov; Emily K B Gordon; Meghan B Lane-Fall
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  The satisfaction regarding handovers between ambulance and emergency department nurses: an observational study.

Authors:  Gijs Thomas Hovenkamp; Tycho Joan Olgers; Remco Robert Wortel; Milou Esmée Noltes; Bert Dercksen; Jan Cornelis Ter Maaten
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 2.953

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.