Search

Background: Handoff miscommunications are a leading source of medical errors. Harmful medical errors decreased in pediatric academic hospitals following implementation of the I-PASS handoff improvement program. However, implementation across specialties has not been assessed., Objective: To determine if I-PASS implementation across diverse settings would be associated with improvements in patient safety and communication., Design: Prospective Type 2 Hybrid effectiveness implementation study., Settings and Participants: Residents from diverse specialties across 32 hospitals (12 community, 20 academic)., Intervention: External teams provided longitudinal coaching over 18 months to facilitate implementation of an enhanced I-PASS program and monthly metric reviews., Main Outcome and Measures: Systematic surveillance surveys assessed rates of resident-reported adverse events. Validated direct observation tools measured verbal and written handoff quality., Results: 2735 resident physicians and 760 faculty champions from multiple specialties (16 internal medicine, 13 pediatric, 3 other) participated. 1942 error surveillance reports were collected. Major and minor handoff-related reported adverse events decreased 47% following implementation, from 1.7 to 0.9 major events/person-year (p < .05) and 17.5 to 9.3 minor events/person-year (p < .001). Implementation was associated with increased inclusion of all five key handoff data elements in verbal (20% vs. 66%, p < .001, n = 4812) and written (10% vs. 74%, p < .001, n = 1787) handoffs, as well as increased frequency of handoffs with high quality verbal (39% vs. 81% p < .001) and written (29% vs. 78%, p < .001) patient summaries, verbal (29% vs. 78%, p < .001) and written (24% vs. 73%, p < .001) contingency plans, and verbal receiver syntheses (31% vs. 83%, p < .001). Improvement was similar across provider types (adult vs. pediatric) and settings (community vs. academic)., (© 2022 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

Direct observation of clinical skills is central to assessment in a competency-based medical education model, yet little is known about how direct observation is experienced by trainees and observers. The objective of the study is to explore how direct observation was experienced by residents and faculty in the context of the I-PASS Handoff Study. In this multi-center qualitative study, we conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews of residents and faculty members at eight tertiary pediatric centers in North America that implemented the I-PASS Handoff Bundle. We employed qualitative thematic analysis to interpret the data. Barriers to and strategies for direct observation were described relating to the observer, trainee, and clinical environment. Residents and faculty described a mutual awareness that residents change their performance of handoffs when observed, in contrast to their usual behavior in a clinical setting. Changes in handoff performance may depend on the nature of the observer or 'audience'. Direct observation also highlighted the importance of handoffs to participants, recognized as a clinical activity that warrants feedback and assessment. Dramaturgical theory can be used to understand our finding of 'front-stage' (observed) versus 'backstage' (unobserved) handoffs as distinct performances, tailored to an "audience". Educators must be cognizant of changes in performance of routine clinical activities when using direct observation to assess clinical competence.

Background: The I-PASS Handoff Study found that introduction of a handoff bundle (handoff and teamwork training for residents, a mnemonic, a handoff tool, a faculty development program, and a sustainability campaign) at 9 pediatrics residency programs was associated with improved communication and patient safety., Objective: This parallel qualitative study aimed to understand resident experiences with I-PASS and to inform future implementation and sustainability strategies., Methods: Resident experiences with I-PASS were explored in focus groups (N = 50 residents) at 8 hospitals throughout 2012-2013. A content analysis of transcripts was conducted following the principles of grounded theory., Results: Residents generally accepted I-PASS as an ideal format for handoffs, and valued learning a structured approach. Across all sites, residents reported full adherence to I-PASS when observed, but selective adherence in usual practice. Residents adhered more closely when patients were complex, teams were unfamiliar, and during evening handoff. Residents reported using elements of the I-PASS mnemonic variably, with Illness Severity and Action Items most consistently used, but Synthesis by Receiver least used, except when observed. Most residents were receptive to the electronic handoff tool, but perceptions about usability varied across sites. Experiences with observation and feedback were mixed. Concern about efficiency commonly influenced attitudes about I-PASS., Conclusions: Residents generally supported I-PASS implementation, but adherence was influenced by patient type, context, and individual and team factors. Our findings could inform future implementation, particularly around the areas of resident engagement in change, sensitivity to resident level, perceived efficiency, and faculty observation., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Background: Miscommunications are a leading cause of serious medical errors. Data from multicenter studies assessing programs designed to improve handoff of information about patient care are lacking., Methods: We conducted a prospective intervention study of a resident handoff-improvement program in nine hospitals, measuring rates of medical errors, preventable adverse events, and miscommunications, as well as resident workflow. The intervention included a mnemonic to standardize oral and written handoffs, handoff and communication training, a faculty development and observation program, and a sustainability campaign. Error rates were measured through active surveillance. Handoffs were assessed by means of evaluation of printed handoff documents and audio recordings. Workflow was assessed through time-motion observations. The primary outcome had two components: medical errors and preventable adverse events., Results: In 10,740 patient admissions, the medical-error rate decreased by 23% from the preintervention period to the postintervention period (24.5 vs. 18.8 per 100 admissions, P<0.001), and the rate of preventable adverse events decreased by 30% (4.7 vs. 3.3 events per 100 admissions, P<0.001). The rate of nonpreventable adverse events did not change significantly (3.0 and 2.8 events per 100 admissions, P=0.79). Site-level analyses showed significant error reductions at six of nine sites. Across sites, significant increases were observed in the inclusion of all prespecified key elements in written documents and oral communication during handoff (nine written and five oral elements; P<0.001 for all 14 comparisons). There were no significant changes from the preintervention period to the postintervention period in the duration of oral handoffs (2.4 and 2.5 minutes per patient, respectively; P=0.55) or in resident workflow, including patient-family contact and computer time., Conclusions: Implementation of the handoff program was associated with reductions in medical errors and in preventable adverse events and with improvements in communication, without a negative effect on workflow. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and others.).