ArticleThe Australasian medical journal2014
Clinical handover: An audit from Australia.
Article in The Australasian medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient handover practice of nurses and associated factors in South Wollo Zone Public Hospitals, Ethiopia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Applying a reflexive framework to evaluate a communication skills curriculum.Advances in medical education and practice · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian National Safety and Quality Health Service (NHQHS) Standards (the "Standards") provide external criteria for hospitals to assess their practices. Since the introduction of the Standards, no Australian hospital has published a report on how its handover practices compare to these Standards.
aimsTo evaluate house medical officer (HMO) shift-to-shift handover practices against the Standards at a large regional hospital.
methodAll HMOs employed by Barwon Health were invited to participate in our qualitative and quantitative study by completing an online questionnaire and taking part in a focus group.
resultsOf the 100 HMOs, 61 completed the questionnaire and 11 HMOs participated in focus groups. Questionnaire results revealed that HMOs were concerned about the quality of shift-to-shift handovers. Fifty-three per cent reported that current shift-to-shift handover practices could be putting patients at risk of adverse events. Ninety-eight per cent indicated that the handover processes could be improved. One hundred per cent of the HMOs stated that the quality of handover varies according to the doctors involved. In the focus groups, issues were raised about current handover structure, documentation, attendance, content, and training.
conclusionHMOs in the current study identified multiple deficiencies in handover practice with regard to structure, documentation, attendance, content, and training. The primary methods to improve handover include making it more structured and standardised, and to provide HMOs with handover training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.