ArticleJAMA network open2025
A Surgical Handover System for Patient Physiology and Safety.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applications of the Early Warning Score as an outcome measure: a systematic review of methodologies.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Pooled it
- Development and pilot evaluation of a structured curriculum for surgical handover.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- "Reality shock"-a qualitative exploration of helicopter emergency medical services nurses' challenges and experiences in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Ineffective patient handover leads to patient harm, yet no criterion standard exists for safe and effective practice in surgery. Objective: To determine whether the SIPS (sickest patients first; introduction, situation, background, assessment, recommendation; prioritize; summarize) surgical handover system is associated with improved patient physiology and safety. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective interventional cohort study included an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design and was carried out between January 2023 and June 2024 at the general surgery departments of 2 tertiary academic hospitals. Physicians participating in postcall (emergency) general surgery handover meetings were included. Data were collected for consecutive patients admitted for emergency general surgery before and after implementation of the intervention, providing they had a minimum of 6 hours of Early Warning Score data available following the time of the handover meeting. Data were analyzed from November 27, 2023, to May, 8, 2025. Exposure: Staff were trained in the use of a 4-step approach to handover meetings, SIPS, which defines the minimum steps required for safe surgical handover. Main Outcomes and Measures: Handover quality, changes in vital signs, length of stay, mortality, escalations in care, staff perceptions of safety, and implementation success were evaluated through handover observations, a retrospective review of patient records, and staff surveys. Results: Data were collected for 2261 patients, including 1469 patients before the intervention (708 [48.2%] female; mean [SD] age 54.6 [20.3] years) and 792 patients after the intervention (411 [51.9%] female; mean [SD] age 52.8 [20.6] years). A total of 182 residents took part in handovers during the study period, during which time 126 handover meetings were observed. After the intervention, handover quality improved across multiple domains without prolonging meeting duration and was associated with significant improvements in patient vital signs at 12 hours (170 patients [21.5%] vs 247 patients [16.8%]; difference, 4.6 [95% CI, 1.2 to 8.1] percentage points; P = .007) and 24 hours (212 patients [26.8%] vs 294 patients [20.0%]; difference, 6.7 [95% CI, 3.0 to 10.4] percentage points; P < .001). Staff-reported handover-related patient safety events also decreased after the intervention (13 days with events [19.7%] vs 4 days with events [4.6%]; difference, -15.1 [95% CI -4.5 to -25.6] percentage points; P = .004), with improvements in staff-perceived handover safety and quality. Successful implementation was confirmed by high rates of adoption, fidelity, and sustainability. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, implementation of the SIPS surgical handover system was associated with improvements in handover quality, patient physiology, and staff perceptions of safety without prolonging handover meetings.
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.