ArticleBMC anesthesiology2024
Implementation and adoption of SOAP-M and SBAR at a German anesthesiology department - a single-center survey study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Teaching Interprofessional Communication in Midwifery Students Using the SBAR Tool.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
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
backgroundChecklists are a common tool used in order to mitigate risks caused by human factors and can facilitate the safe induction of anesthesia as well as handovers. SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) is a checklist recommended by the WHO and DGAI for handovers, while SOAP-M (Suction, Oxygen, Airway, Pharmaceuticals, Monitoring) is a checklist for the induction of anesthesia. This study investigates the implementation and adoption of these two checklists.
methodsWe conducted a single-center online survey one year after the implementation of SOAP-M and SBAR at a university hospital's anesthesiology department, using scales from three validated questionnaires to assess safety attitudes as well as the behavior of staff and the perceived usefulness of the checklists.
resultsStaff with a high score in general attitude towards patient safety, as determined by the safety attitudes questionnaire, considered both checklists useful additions to their work environment. Nurses and physicians (p = 0.102) as well as groups divided according to work experience (p = 0.077) showed no significant differences in using SOAP-M and SBAR. Perceived usefulness was significantly higher (p < 0.001) among users of the checklists, and the same goes for positive reinforcement (p < 0.001), social cues (p = 0.0215) and goal cues (p = 0.0252).
conclusionSOAP-M and SBAR are perceived as useful checklists for patient handovers and anesthesia induction by tertiary referral hospital's employees with high score in general safety attitude and were therefore commonly used one year after their introduction. No significant difference in checklist adoption between occupations as well as groups divided according to work experience could be found. Perceived usefulness is significantly higher among users of the checklist, who feel using the checklists provides more support.
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.