BACKGROUND: The term "holdover admissions" refers to patients admitted by an overnight physician and whose care is then transferred to a new primary team the next morning. Descriptions of the holdover process in internal medicine are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To identify important factors affecting the quality of holdover handoffs at an internal medicine (IM) residency program and to compare them to previously identified factors for other handoffs. DESIGN: We undertook a qualitative study using structured focus groups and interviews. We analyzed data using qualitative content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: IM residents, IM program directors, and hospitalists at a large academic medical center. MAIN MEASURES: A nine-question open-ended interview guide. KEY RESULTS: We identified 13 factors describing holdover handoffs. Five factors-physical space, standardization, task accountability, closed-loop verification, and resilience-were similar to those described in prior handoff literature in other specialties. Eight factors were new concepts that may uniquely affect the quality of the holdover handoff in IM. These included electronic health record access, redundancy, unwritten thoughts, different clinician needs, diagnostic uncertainty, anchoring, teaching, and feedback. These factors were organized into five overarching themes: physical environment, information transfer, responsibility, clinical reasoning, and education. CONCLUSIONS: The holdover handoff in IM is complex and has unique considerations for achieving high quality. Further exploration of safe, efficient, and educational holdover handoff practices is necessary.
BACKGROUND: The term "holdover admissions" refers to patients admitted by an overnight physician and whose care is then transferred to a new primary team the next morning. Descriptions of the holdover process in internal medicine are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To identify important factors affecting the quality of holdover handoffs at an internal medicine (IM) residency program and to compare them to previously identified factors for other handoffs. DESIGN: We undertook a qualitative study using structured focus groups and interviews. We analyzed data using qualitative content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: IM residents, IM program directors, and hospitalists at a large academic medical center. MAIN MEASURES: A nine-question open-ended interview guide. KEY RESULTS: We identified 13 factors describing holdover handoffs. Five factors-physical space, standardization, task accountability, closed-loop verification, and resilience-were similar to those described in prior handoff literature in other specialties. Eight factors were new concepts that may uniquely affect the quality of the holdover handoff in IM. These included electronic health record access, redundancy, unwritten thoughts, different clinician needs, diagnostic uncertainty, anchoring, teaching, and feedback. These factors were organized into five overarching themes: physical environment, information transfer, responsibility, clinical reasoning, and education. CONCLUSIONS: The holdover handoff in IM is complex and has unique considerations for achieving high quality. Further exploration of safe, efficient, and educational holdover handoff practices is necessary.
Entities:
Keywords:
care transitions; handoff; holdover; hospital medicine; medical education-graduate
Authors: Mark L Graber; Stephanie Kissam; Velma L Payne; Ashley N D Meyer; Asta Sorensen; Nancy Lenfestey; Elizabeth Tant; Kerm Henriksen; Kenneth Labresh; Hardeep Singh Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Hardeep Singh; Mark L Graber; Stephanie M Kissam; Asta V Sorensen; Nancy F Lenfestey; Elizabeth M Tant; Kerm Henriksen; Kenneth A LaBresh Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2011-11-30 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Christopher Beach; Dickson S Cheung; Julie Apker; Leora I Horwitz; Eric E Howell; Kevin J O'Leary; Emily S Patterson; Jeremiah D Schuur; Robert Wears; Mark Williams Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Amy J Starmer; Theodore C Sectish; Dennis W Simon; Carol Keohane; Maireade E McSweeney; Erica Y Chung; Catherine S Yoon; Stuart R Lipsitz; Ari J Wassner; Marvin B Harper; Christopher P Landrigan Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Hana Lim; Katie E Raffel; James D Harrison; R Jeffrey Kohlwes; Gurpreet Dhaliwal; Sirisha Narayana Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: John D Wolfe; James R Gardner; William C Beck; John R Taylor; Avi Bhavaraju; Ben Davis; Mary Katherine Kimbrough; Ronald D Robertson; Saleema A Karim; Kevin W Sexton Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2018-09-08
Authors: Jessie Yuk Seng Chung; William Ho Cheung Li; Ankie Tan Cheung; Laurie Long Kwan Ho; Joyce Oi Kwan Chung Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Derek S Stenquist; Caleb M Yeung; Hannah J Szapary; Laura Rossi; Antonia F Chen; Mitchel B Harris Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev Date: 2022-09-06