Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39699203›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2025

Analyzing and mitigating the risks of patient harm during operating room to intensive care unit patient handoffs.

Nara Regina Spall Martins, Edson Zangiacomi Martinez, Cláudia Marquez Simões, Paul Randall Barach, Maria José Carvalho Carmona

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2025. 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. Review
  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

5 authors.

Nara Regina Spall MartinsFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455 - Sala 4107, São Paulo, São Paulo 01246-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2277-8502
Edson Zangiacomi MartinezFaculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Avenida Bandeirantes, 3900 Bairro Monte Alegre, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo 14049-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0949-3222
Cláudia Marquez SimõesFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455 - Sala 4107, São Paulo, São Paulo 01246-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4306-5168
Paul Randall BarachSchool of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, 901 Walnut St Ste 10, 19107, Philadelphia, Pensilvânia 19107, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7906-698X
Maria José Carvalho CarmonaFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455 - Sala 4107, São Paulo, São Paulo 01246-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3031-2924

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients continue to suffer from preventable harm and uneven quality outcomes. Reliable clinical outcomes depend on the quality of robust administrative systems and reliable support processes. Critically ill patient handoffs from the operating room (OR) to the intensive care unit (ICU) are known to be high-risk events. We describe a novel perspective on how risk factors associated with the process of patient handoff communication between the OR and the ICU can lead to flawed communication, degraded team awareness, medical errors, and increased patient harm. Data were collected from two semi-structured focus groups using a five-step risk management approach at a tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. We conducted a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) with multidisciplinary healthcare providers consisting of attending physicians, anesthesiologists, nurses, and physiotherapists involved in patient handoffs. We analyzed the results using a similitude analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing this novel risk management approach. We identified the handoffs risks associated with patients, staff, institution, and potential financial risks. The FMEA identified 12 process failures and 36 causes that generated 12 consequences and pointed to robust needed preventive measures to mitigate handoff risks. The clinical teams reported that this approach allowed them to see the process more completely as a whole not only in their narrow silos, thus understanding the enablers and difficulties of the other team members and how this understanding can shed light on their mental models, actions, and the process reliability. Teams identified key steps in the OR to ICU handoff process that are prone to the highest hazards to patients, the hospital, and staff, and are currently targeted for process improvement. Evidence-driven recommendations intended for reducing the risks associated with patient handoffs are presented. Implementing a dynamic risk management, interdisciplinary approach was used to redesign the OR to ICU patient handoff approach around the patient's and clinician's needs. The risk management program helped healthcare providers identify handoff steps, highlighting risky handoff process failures, making it possible to identify actionable failures, consequences, and define preventative action plans for mitigating the risks to improve the quality and safety of patient handoffs.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsOperating RoomsPatient HandoffRisk ManagementBrazilCommunicationFocus GroupsHealthcare Failure Mode and Effect AnalysisHumansMedical ErrorsPatient Care TeamPatient SafetyRisk Factorsfailure modes and effects analysis (FMEA)hand-offprocess mappingqualitative researchrisk management

Identifiers

PMID39699203
PMCPMC11739622

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.