Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38702061›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2024

Improving clinical reasoning and communication during handover: An intervention study of the BRIEF-C tool.

Ghazwan Altabbaa, Tanya Nathalie Beran, Marcia Clark, Elizabeth Oddone Paolucci

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Ghazwan AltabbaaDepartment of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada galtabba@ucalgary.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-9983-4448
Tanya Nathalie BeranCommunity Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0312-3658
Marcia ClarkDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Elizabeth Oddone PaolucciCommunity Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting handover communication tools often lack a clear theoretical foundation, have limited psychometric evidence, and overlook effective communication strategies for enhancing diagnostic reasoning. This oversight becomes critical as communication breakdowns during handovers have been implicated in poor patient care. To address these issues, we developed a structured communication tool: Background, Responsible diagnosis, Included differential diagnosis, Excluded differential diagnosis, Follow-up, and Communication (BRIEF-C). It is informed by cognitive bias theory, shows evidence of reliability and validity of its scores, and includes strategies for actively sending and receiving information in medical handovers.

designA pre-test post-test intervention study.

settingInpatient internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery units at one tertiary care hospital.

interventionThe BRIEF-C tool was presented to internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery faculty and residents who participated in an in-person educational session, followed by a 2-week period where they practised using it with feedback. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical handovers were audiorecorded over 1 week for the pre- and again for the post-periods, then transcribed for analysis. Two faculty raters from internal medicine and orthopaedic surgery scored the transcripts of handovers using the BRIEF-C framework. The two raters were blinded to the time periods.

resultsA principal component analysis identified two subscales on the BRIEF-C: diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication, with high interitem consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.82 and 0.99, respectively). One sample t-test indicated significant improvement in diagnostic clinical reasoning (pre-test: M=0.97, SD=0.50; post-test: M=1.31, SD=0.64; t(64)=4.26, p<0.05, medium to large Cohen's d=0.63) and communication (pre-test: M=0.02, SD=0.16; post-test: M=0.48, SD=0.83); t(64)=4.52, p<0.05, large Cohen's d=0.83).

conclusionThis study demonstrates evidence supporting the reliability and validity of scores on the BRIEF-C as good indicators of diagnostic clinical reasoning and communication shared during handovers.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningCommunicationPatient HandoffHumansInternal MedicineReproducibility of ResultsCommunicationPatient safetyQuality improvementTransitions in care

Identifiers

PMID38702061
PMCPMC11086570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.