Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24026973›Full record

ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2015

Emergency Care Handover (ECHO study) across care boundaries: the need for joint decision making and consideration of psychosocial history.

Mark A Sujan, Peter Chessum, Michelle Rudd, Laurence Fitton, Matthew Inada-Kim, Peter Spurgeon, Matthew W Cooke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mark A SujanWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Peter ChessumHeart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Michelle RuddUnited Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, UK.
Laurence FittonOxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK.
Matthew Inada-KimHampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Winchester, UK.
Peter SpurgeonWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Matthew W CookeWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 10/1007/26Department of Health HS&DR/10/1007/26
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInadequate handover in emergency care is a threat to patient safety. Handover across care boundaries poses particular problems due to different professional, organisational and cultural backgrounds. While there have been many suggestions for standardisation of handover content, relatively little is known about the verbal behaviours that shape handover conversations. This paper explores both what is communicated (content) and how this is communicated (verbal behaviours) during different types of handover conversations across care boundaries in emergency care.

methodsThree types of interorganisational (ambulance service to emergency department (ED) in 'resuscitation' and 'majors' areas) and interdepartmental handover conversations (referrals to acute medicine) were audio recorded in three National Health Service EDs. Handover conversations were segmented into utterances. Frequency counts for content and language forms were derived for each type of handover using Discourse Analysis. Verbal behaviours were identified using Conversation Analysis.

results203 handover conversations were analysed. Handover conversations involving ambulance services were predominantly descriptive (60%-65% of utterances), unidirectional and focused on patient presentation (75%-80%). Referrals entailed more collaborative talk focused on the decision to admit and immediate care needs. Across all types of handover, only 1.5%-5% of handover conversation content related to the patient's social and psychological needs.

conclusionsHandover may entail both descriptive talk aimed at information transfer and collaborative talk aimed at joint decision-making. Standardisation of handover needs to accommodate collaborative aspects and should incorporate communication of information relevant to the patient's social and psychological needs to establish appropriate care arrangements at the earliest opportunity.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationContinuity of Patient CareCooperative BehaviorDecision MakingFemaleHumansInterdepartmental RelationsInterprofessional RelationsMaleMiddle AgedPatient Handoffcommunicationsemergency care systemsmanagement, risk managementprehospital care, communicationsrisk management

Identifiers

PMID24026973
PMCPMC4316834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.