ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Impact of I-PASS handover training on compliance and communication quality: a clinical audit at a teaching hospital.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical handover between the emergency department (ED) and inpatient units is a high-risk process prone to communication errors and patient harm. This audit evaluated ED-to-internal medicine handover practices and assessed the impact of implementing an I-PASS-based standardized framework. Methods: A prospective closed-loop clinical audit was conducted at a public teaching hospital in Sudan in April 2024. Baseline data were collected via a structured questionnaire assessing compliance with I-PASS criteria, with a target standard of 100%. Thirteen questionnaire responses were analyzed in the first cycle. Following gap identification, a structured bedside I-PASS handover was implemented and reassessed in a second cycle. Results: Baseline handovers were informal and unstructured, with no standardized tool in use. All handovers were verbal; 30.8% occurred via telephone. Critical safety elements were inconsistently communicated: pending investigations were mentioned in 15.4% of cases, isolation precautions in 7.7%, risk identification in 46.2%, and next-step review in 38.5%. Patient or family involvement occurred in only 7.7% of cases. Following I-PASS implementation, structured bedside handovers were universally adopted. Core clinical elements achieved complete or near-complete compliance. Patient or family involvement increased from 7.7 to 92.3%. Conclusion: Baseline handover practices were variable and nonstandardized. I-PASS implementation was associated with improved handover compliance and perceived communication quality across all measured domains. Standardized handover is feasible in resource-limited settings, although further studies incorporating clinical outcome measures are needed.
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.