Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28523364›Full record

ReviewDer Anaesthesist2017

[Structured patient handovers in perioperative medicine : Rationale and implementation in clinical practice].

M J Merkel, V von Dossow, B Zwißler

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

M J MerkelKlinik für Anaesthesiologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland.
V von DossowKlinik für Anaesthesiologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland. vera.dossow@med.uni-muenchen.de.
B ZwißlerKlinik für Anaesthesiologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clear and consistent communication is pivotal for well-functioning teamwork, in operating theatres as well as intensive care units. However, patient handovers significantly vary between specialties and locations. If communication is not well structured, it might increase the risk for mishaps and malpractice. Therefore, implementing structured handover protocols is pivotal. The perioperative setting is a high-risk environment that is prone to communication failures due to operational design (frequent change of shift due to working time restrictions) and a high work load and multitasking (operating room management, short surgery times, concurrent emergencies). Hence teamwork in the operating room and intensive care unit requires clear and consistent communication. In the perioperative setting, the patient is transferred several times: from the ward to operating room, to recovery, intermediate care/intensive care unit and back to normal ward. This necessitates multiple handovers. Since 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) requests a structured handover concept that processes all relevant information in a predefined order. The SBAR concept (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) is an intuitive communication concept that can improve quality of patient handovers. This underlines the clinical relevance of a structured handover concept that leads to improved outcomes for every patient.In this review, basic measures for a clear and consistent communication are presented. These are pivotal for an effective teamwork and for ensuing patient safety. Furthermore, we will focus on possibilities to implement structured approaches but also on potential barriers of implementation. Communication failure among different health care providers can be identified more easily and hopefully can be eliminated.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsCommunicationCritical CareHumansOperating RoomsPatient HandoffPatient TransferPerioperative CareCommunication toolImplementationPatient safetyPotential barriersSBAR

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.