ArticleCureus2025
I-PASS-Based Handoff Pilot in a High-Volume Urban Hospital: Benefits and Barriers for Hospitalists.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The I-PASS bundle is a standardized care handoff associated with improved outcomes that is widely used in residency training. Sustainable use of I-PASS bundle components among attending hospital medicine providers merits further study. After we implemented a handoffs pilot process including written handoffs and Epic chat message (surrogate for verbal handoff) based on the I-PASS protocol, providers reported high levels of satisfaction. However, the pilot tool was utilized infrequently, and use ceased after the pilot. Methodology We utilized qualitative methods to assess attending physicians' and Advanced Practice Providers' perceptions to understand discrepancies between perceived utility and actual use. From February to March 2022, we interviewed 13 attending hospitalist physicians (n = 11) and Advanced Practice Providers (n = 2) individually or in homogenous focus groups; we transcribed recordings for qualitative coding (interrater agreement was κ = 0.82). We coded and analyzed the textual data via the specific concerns participants shared in the interviews and focus groups. Results Participants felt that while the I-PASS-based tool was suboptimal, the pilot raised overall awareness and use of handoff processes. They recommended that feasible handoff processes provide necessary information quickly for cross-cover providers, but do not require similar details for stable patients. Most participants reported that existing electronic medical record chat functions along with notes were adequate and more efficient. They also recommended standardizing format and processes; obtaining buy-in from all patient care providers; education on efficient use of tools; and formal, explicit expectations that providers complete handoffs. Conclusions Handoffs are an important component of patient safety measures. While they perceived the I-PASS-based tool to be suboptimal in several aspects, participants felt that the handoff quality improvement pilot raised overall awareness and use of handoff processes, which they felt was important for patient safety. Implementation of I-PASS bundle components may require contextual adaptation.
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.