ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2023
Standardized evaluation of hand-off documentation of ICU boarders in the emergency department.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2023. 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.
- Frontline Providers' and Patients' Perspectives on Improving Diagnostic Safety in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2024Article
- Standardized evaluation of hand-off documentation of ICU boarders in the emergency department.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2023Article
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
Objective: The boarding of ICU patients in the emergency department (ED) represents a considerable risk to patient safety. This study aims to describe the generation of a rubric to ensure the fidelity of vital, written hand-off between ED teams. Methods: We performed a mixed methods design to develop a scoring rubric to evaluate written hand-off communication of medical ICU boarders between ED teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was the quality of the written hand-off as agreed upon by the inter-user agreement. Our secondary outcome included variability in written quality as a function of the number of separate and distinct ED teams at the point of the transition of care. Results: There was a moderate inter-user agreement with rubric scoring (κ = 0.70 [95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.75]). The overall trend noted that several key elements, including code status, performed interventions, and contingency planning, were infrequently documented. Conclusions: We effectively created a quality assurance tool for ED ICU boarders that ensures relevant and vital information is relayed between ED teams. Our analysis demonstrated that all relevant information is only sometimes present in the hand-off.
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.