Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36271329›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

Clinical handover communication at maternity shift changes and women's safety in Banjul, the Gambia: a mixed-methods study.

Faith Rickard, Fides Lu, Lotta Gustafsson, Christine MacArthur, Carole Cummins, Ivan Coker, Amie Wilson, Kebba Mane, Kebba Manneh, Semira Manaseki-Holland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

10 authors.

Faith Rickard *University of Birmingham Medical School, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Fides Lu *University of Birmingham Medical School, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Lotta GustafssonUniversity of Birmingham Medical School, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Christine MacArthurInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Brimingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Carole CumminsInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Brimingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Ivan CokerBundung Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Banjul, The Gambia.
Amie WilsonInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Brimingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Kebba ManeBundung Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Banjul, The Gambia.
Kebba MannehKanifing General Hospital, Banjul, The Gambia.
Semira Manaseki-HollandInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Brimingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK. s.manasekiholland@bham.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical handover is a vital communication process for patient safety; transferring patient responsibility between healthcare professionals (HCPs). Exploring handover processes in maternity care is fundamental for service quality, addressing continuity of care and maternal mortality.

methodsThis mixed-methods study was conducted in all three maternity hospitals in Banjul, The Gambia. Shift-to-shift maternity handovers were observed and compared against a standard investigating content and environment. Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with doctors, midwives and nurses explored handover experience.

resultsOne hundred ten nurse/midwife shift-to-shift handovers were observed across all shift times and maternity wards; only 666 of 845 women (79%) were handed over. Doctors had no scheduled handover. Shift-leads alone gave/received handover, delayed [median 35 min, IQR 24-45] 82% of the time; 96% of handovers were not confidential and 29% were disrupted. Standardised guidelines and training were lacking. A median 6 of 28 topics [IQR 5-9] were communicated per woman. Information varied significantly by time, high-risk classification and location. For women in labour, 10 [IQR 8-14] items were handed-over, 8 [IQR 5-11] for women classed 'high-risk', 5 [IQR 4-7] for ante/postnatal women (p < 0.001); > 50% had no care management plan communicated. Twenty-one interviews and two focus groups were conducted. Facilitators and barriers to effective handover surrounding three health service factors emerged; health systems (e.g. absence of formalised handover training), organisation culture (e.g. absence of multidisciplinary team handover) and individual clinician factors (e.g. practical barriers such as transportation difficulties in getting to work).

conclusionMaternity handover was inconsistent, hindered by contextual barriers including lack of team communication and guidelines, delays, with some women omitted entirely. Findings alongside HCPs views demonstrate feasible opportunities for enhancing handover, thereby improving women's safety.

Indexed as

Maternal Health ServicesPatient HandoffCommunicationFemaleFocus GroupsGambiaHumansPatient SafetyPregnancycommunicationHandovermaternityquality improvementsafety

Identifiers

PMID36271329
PMCPMC9587588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.