ArticleBMJ open2023
Readiness for transfer: a mixed-methods study on ICU transfers of care.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePast studies on intensive care unit (ICU) patient transfers compare the efficacy of using standardised checklists against unstructured communications. Less studied are the experiences of clinicians in enacting bidirectional (send/receive) transfers. This study reports on the differences in protocols and data elements between receiving and sending transfers in the ICU, and the elements constituting readiness for transfer.
methodsMixed-methods study of a 574-bed general hospital in Singapore with a 74-bed ICU for surgical and medical patients. Six focus group discussions (FGDs) with 34 clinicians comprising 15 residents and 19 nurses, followed by a structured questionnaire survey of 140 clinicians comprising 21 doctors and 119 nurses. FGD transcripts were analysed according to the standard qualitative research guidelines. Survey data were analysed using Student's t-test with Bonferroni corrections.
resultsGeneral ward (GW) clinicians are more likely to receive ICU patients with complete discharge summaries while ICU clinicians receiving GW patients get significantly less data. Emergency department (ED), GW and operating theatre physicians accompany their patients to the ICU while ICU nurses accompany their patients to the GW. Not all units, such as the ED, experience bidirectional transfers.
conclusionThe protocols and supporting data elements of an ICU transfer vary by the type of transfer and transferring unit. Readiness for transfer means that sending unit protocols affirmatively consider the needs of the receiving unit's data needs and resource constraints.
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.