Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39975963›Full record

ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025

Handoffs and transitions of care in the intensive care unit: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee clinical consensus document.

Rachel D Appelbaum, Michael S Farrell, J Jason Hoth, Hee Soo Jung, Abhijit Pathak, Aussama K Nassar, Joseph Cuschieri, Deborah M Stein, John V Agapian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. An Unexpected Outcome during Transition from Open to Closed Intensive Care Unit: What Went Wrong?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Rachel D AppelbaumVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6401-4060
Michael S FarrellLehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7665-2775
J Jason HothWake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0009-0004-9533-6830
Hee Soo JungUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9378-1309
Abhijit PathakTemple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Aussama K NassarStanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Joseph CuschieriUCSF, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1456-6841
Deborah M SteinUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3683-3963
John V AgapianRiverside University Health System, Moreno Valley, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractObjectives: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Critical Care Committee chose handoffs and transitions of care in the intensive care unit (ICU) as a clinically relevant topic for review. This clinical consensus document aims to provide practical guidance to the surgical intensivist on the best practices for patient handoffs and transitions of care. Methods: A working group was formed from the committee-at-large to complete this work. The members of the working group were each assigned a subtopic to review using research to date. The research on which the recommendations are based was compiled at the discretion of the working group. Any topic with discrepant or minimal supporting literature was reviewed by the AAST Critical Care Committee through an anonymous survey. Results: Recommendations for healthcare handovers include formally recognized handoffs at dedicated times, an interactive verbal exchange including all patients with a focus on what to anticipate or what is needs to be completed, tools to record and maintain information, and training to new providers on the handoff process and technology. Conclusion: As clinicians, we strive to provide the best evidence-based care to our patients. It is essential to study these high states, ICU handoffs to enhance the safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of patient care transitions, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes and provider satisfaction. Level of evidence: V.

Indexed as

communicationintensive care unitsquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID39975963
PMCPMC11836866

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.