Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24448849›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2014

SBAR improves communication and safety climate and decreases incident reports due to communication errors in an anaesthetic clinic: a prospective intervention study.

Maria Randmaa, Gunilla Mårtensson, Christine Leo Swenne, Maria Engström

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04582513 (Impact of an Anesthesia Care Handover-Checklist on Adverse Perioperative Outcome), which is not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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.

NCT04582513 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Impact of an Anesthesia Care Handover-Checklist on Adverse Perioperative Outcome (AnCHor - Checklist) Pilot Trial

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital HeidelbergRan2020 to 2021Enrolled300ConditionsMajor SurgeryArmsAnCHor-Checklist implementation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Examining the impact of validated handover protocols on treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients: a systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Handoffs in the intensive care unit].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Maria RandmaaFaculty of Health and Occupational Studies, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden.
Gunilla Mårtensson
Christine Leo Swenne
Maria Engström

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to examine staff members' perceptions of communication within and between different professions, safety attitudes and psychological empowerment, prior to and after implementation of the communication tool Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) at an anaesthetic clinic. The aim was also to study whether there was any change in the proportion of incident reports caused by communication errors.

designA prospective intervention study with comparison group using preassessments and postassessments. Questionnaire data were collected from staff in an intervention (n=100) and a comparison group (n=69) at the anaesthetic clinic in two hospitals prior to (2011) and after (2012) implementation of SBAR. The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors was calculated during a 1-year period prior to and after implementation.

settingAnaesthetic clinics at two hospitals in Sweden.

participantsAll licensed practical nurses, registered nurses and physicians working in the operating theatres, intensive care units and postanaesthesia care units at anaesthetic clinics in two hospitals were invited to participate.

interventionImplementation of SBAR in an anaesthetic clinic. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes were staff members' perception of communication within and between different professions, as well as their perceptions of safety attitudes. Secondary outcomes were psychological empowerment and incident reports due to error of communication.

resultsIn the intervention group, there were statistically significant improvements in the factors 'Between-group communication accuracy' (p=0.039) and 'Safety climate' (p=0.011). The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors decreased significantly (p<0.0001) in the intervention group, from 31% to 11%.

conclusionsImplementing the communication tool SBAR in anaesthetic clinics was associated with improvement in staff members' perception of communication between professionals and their perception of the safety climate as well as with a decreased proportion of incident reports related to communication errors.

trial registrationISRCTN37251313.

Indexed as

Communication BarriersGuideline AdherenceSafety ManagementAnesthesiologyAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaBelgiumCanadaFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsInterdisciplinary CommunicationMaleMedical Staff, HospitalMiddle AgedNetherlands

Identifiers

PMID24448849
PMCPMC3902348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.