Search

IntroductionThe I-PASS Handoff Program is a comprehensive handoff curriculum that has been shown to decrease rates of medical errors and adverse events during patient handoffs. Frontline providers are the key individuals participating in handoffs of patient care. It is important they receive robust handoff training.MethodsThe I-PASS Mentored Implementation Handoff Curriculum frontline provider training materials were created as part of the original I-PASS Study and adapted for the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program. The adapted materials embrace a flipped classroom approach with an emphasis on adult learning theory principles. The training includes an overview of I-PASS handoff techniques, TeamSTEPPS team communication strategies, verbal handoff simulation scenarios, and a printed handoff document exercise.ResultsAs part of the SHM I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program, 2,735 frontline providers were trained at 32 study sites (16 adult and 16 pediatric) across North America. At the end of their training, 1,762 frontline providers completed the workshop evaluation form (64% response rate). After receiving the training, over 90% agreed/strongly agreed that they were able to distinguish a good- from a poor-quality handoff, articulate the elements of the I-PASS mnemonic, construct a high-quality patient summary, advocate for an appropriate environment for handoffs, and participate in handoff simulations. Universally, the training provided them with knowledge and skills relevant to their patient care activities.DiscussionThe I-PASS frontline training materials were rated highly by those trained and are an integral part of a successful I-PASS Handoff Program implementation.

IntroductionThe I-PASS Handoff Program is a comprehensive handoff curriculum that has been shown to decrease rates of medical errors and adverse events during patient handoffs. I-PASS champions are a critical part of the implementation and sustainment of this curriculum, and therefore, a rigorous program to support their training is necessary.MethodsThe I-PASS Handoff champion training materials were created for the original I-PASS Study and adapted for the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program. The adapted materials embrace a flipped classroom approach and adult learning theory. The training includes an overview of I-PASS handoff techniques, an opportunity to practice evaluating handoffs with the I-PASS observation tools using a handoff video vignette, and other key implementation principles.ResultsAs part of the SHM I-PASS Mentored Implementation Program, 366 champions were trained at 32 sites across North America and participated in a total of 3,491 handoff observations. A total of 346 champions completed the I-PASS Champion Workshop evaluation form at the end of their training (response rate: 94.5%). After receiving the training, over 90% agreed/strongly agreed that it provided them with knowledge or skills critical to their patient care activities and that they were able to distinguish the difference between high- and poor-quality handoffs, competently use the I-PASS handoff assessment tools, and articulate the importance of handoff observations.ConclusionThe I-PASS champion training materials were rated highly by those trained and are an integral part of a successful I-PASS Handoff Program implementation.

IntroductionCommunication failures during shift-to-shift handoffs of patient care have been identified as a leading cause of adverse events in health care institutions. The I-PASS Handoff Program is a comprehensive handoff program that has been shown to decrease rates of medical errors and adverse events. As part of the spread and adaptation of this program, a comprehensive implementation guide was created to assist individuals in the implementation process.MethodsThe I-PASS Mentored Implementation Guide grew out of materials created for the original I-PASS Study, Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) mentored implementation programs, and the experience of members of the I-PASS Study Group. The guide provides a comprehensive framework of all elements required to implement the large-scale I-PASS Handoff Program and contains detailed information on generating institutional support, training activities, a campaign, measuring impact, and sustaining the program.ResultsThirty-two sites across North America utilized the guide as part of the SHM program. The guide served as a main reference for 477 hours of mentoring phone calls between site leads and their mentors. Postprogram surveys from wave 2 sites revealed that 85% (N = 34) of respondents felt the quality of the guide was very good/excellent. Site leads noted that they referenced the guide most often during the early part of the program and that they referenced the sections on the curriculum and handoff observations most often.DiscussionThe I-PASS Mentored Implementation Guide is an essential resource for those looking to implement the large-scale I-PASS Handoff Program at their institution.

BackgroundBehavior change is notoriously difficult to achieve within health care systems. Successful implementation of the I-PASS handoff bundle with subsequent decreases in medical errors and preventable adverse events represents an example of successful transformational change within academic medical centers.ObjectiveWe designed a campaign to support and enhance uptake of the I-PASS handoff bundle at 9 study sites from 2011 to 2013.MethodsFollowing Kotter's model of transformational change, we established urgency using local data and institutional mandates, and site leaders built local guiding coalitions with institutional leaders, key faculty, and Chief Residents. We created and communicated our vision using a branded campaign and empowered others to act by soliciting and acting on feedback and supporting systems changes. Site leaders planned for and created short-term wins by recognizing residents who engaged with I-PASS, consolidated improvements, and institutionalized new approaches.ResultsImplementation of I-PASS was successful, with achievement of substantial improvements in rates of medical errors and preventable adverse events. Data from the initial I-PASS study have continued to drive a national campaign that has included national recognition by leaders in the field of patient safety and pediatrics. Momentum has increased significantly to support mentored implementation of the I-PASS handoff program at over 35 academic medical centers across North America.ConclusionsI-PASS provides an example of transformational change achieved through a combination of educational interventions and change management to address resistance/barriers, supported by a robust campaign. We encourage others in academic medicine to consider using change models, including campaigns, to support health care improvement programs.

ImportanceMedical errors and adverse events (AEs) are common among hospitalized children. While clinician reports are the foundation of operational hospital safety surveillance and a key component of multifaceted research surveillance, patient and family reports are not routinely gathered. We hypothesized that a novel family-reporting mechanism would improve incident detection.ObjectiveTo compare error and AE rates (1) gathered systematically with vs without family reporting, (2) reported by families vs clinicians, and (3) reported by families vs hospital incident reports.Design, setting, and participantsWe conducted a prospective cohort study including the parents/caregivers of 989 hospitalized patients 17 years and younger (total 3902 patient-days) and their clinicians from December 2014 to July 2015 in 4 US pediatric centers. Clinician abstractors identified potential errors and AEs by reviewing medical records, hospital incident reports, and clinician reports as well as weekly and discharge Family Safety Interviews (FSIs). Two physicians reviewed and independently categorized all incidents, rating severity and preventability (agreement, 68%-90%; κ, 0.50-0.68). Discordant categorizations were reconciled. Rates were generated using Poisson regression estimated via generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures on the same patient.Main outcomes and measuresError and AE rates.ResultsOverall, 746 parents/caregivers consented for the study. Of these, 717 completed FSIs. Their median (interquartile range) age was 32.5 (26-40) years; 380 (53.0%) were nonwhite, 566 (78.9%) were female, 603 (84.1%) were English speaking, and 380 (53.0%) had attended college. Of 717 parents/caregivers completing FSIs, 185 (25.8%) reported a total of 255 incidents, which were classified as 132 safety concerns (51.8%), 102 nonsafety-related quality concerns (40.0%), and 21 other concerns (8.2%). These included 22 preventable AEs (8.6%), 17 nonharmful medical errors (6.7%), and 11 nonpreventable AEs (4.3%) on the study unit. In total, 179 errors and 113 AEs were identified from all sources. Family reports included 8 otherwise unidentified AEs, including 7 preventable AEs. Error rates with family reporting (45.9 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.2-fold (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) higher than rates without family reporting (39.7 per 1000 patient-days). Adverse event rates with family reporting (28.7 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.1-fold (95% CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .006) higher than rates without (26.1 per 1000 patient-days). Families and clinicians reported similar rates of errors (10.0 vs 12.8 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 0.8; 95% CI, .5-1.2) and AEs (8.5 vs 6.2 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.2). Family-reported error rates were 5.0-fold (95% CI, 1.9-13.0) higher and AE rates 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.2-6.7) higher than hospital incident report rates.Conclusions and relevanceFamilies provide unique information about hospital safety and should be included in hospital safety surveillance in order to facilitate better design and assessment of interventions to improve safety.

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.

The Seamless Transitions and (Re)admissions Network (STARNet) met in December 2012 to synthesize ongoing hospital-to-home transition work, discuss goals, and develop a plan to centralize transition information in the future. STARNet participants consisted of experts in the field of pediatric hospital medicine quality improvement and research, and included physicians and key stakeholders from hospital groups, private payers, as well as representatives from current transition collaboratives. In this report, we (1) review the current knowledge regarding hospital-to-home transitions; (2) outline the challenges of measuring and reducing readmissions; and (3) highlight research gaps and list potential measures for transition quality. STARNet met with the support of the American Academy of Pediatrics' Quality Improvement Innovation Networks and the Section on Hospital Medicine.

ObjectiveTo assess the status of pulse oximetry screening and barriers to implementing screening programs.MethodsThis was a prospective pre-post intervention survey of nurse managers and medical directors of hospital-based birthing centers in Oregon, Idaho, and Southern Washington. The intervention was a 7-minute video demonstrating and discussing pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease.ResultsAnalysis of matched pairs showed a significant increase in the use of pulse oximetry screening during the study period from 52% to 73% (P < .0001). Following implementation of the video, the perception of all queried potential barriers decreased significantly among individuals from hospitals self-identified as nonscreening at baseline. Viewing the educational video was associated with an increase in the percentage of individuals from nonscreening hospitals that rated screening as "very beneficial" (45% vs 90%, P = .0001).ConclusionsAn educational video was associated with improved opinions of pulse oximetry screening among hospitals not currently screening.

Background Miscommunications during care transfers are a leading cause of medical errors. Recent consensus-based recommendations to standardise information transfer from outpatient clinics to the emergency department (ED) have not been formally evaluated. We sought to determine whether a receiver-driven structured handoff intervention is associated with 1) increased inclusion of standardised elements; 2) reduced miscommunications and 3) increased perceived quality, safety and efficiency. Methods We conducted a prospective intervention study in a paediatric ED and affiliated clinics in 20162018. We developed a bundled handoff intervention included a standard template, receiver training, awareness campaign and iterative feedback. We assessed a random sample of audio-recorded handoffs and associated medical records to measure rates of inclusion of standardised elements and rate of miscommunications. We surveyed key stakeholders pre-intervention and postintervention to assess perceptions of quality, safety and efficiency of the handoff process. Results Across 162 handoffs, implementation of a receiver-driven intervention was associated with significantly increased inclusion of important elements, including illness severity (46% vs 77%), tasks completed (64% vs 83%), expectations (61% vs 76%), pending tests (0% vs 64%), contingency plans (0% vs 54%), detailed callback request (7% vs 81%) and synthesis (2% vs 73%). Miscommunications decreased from 48% to 26%, a relative reduction of 23% (95% CI -39% to -7%). Perceptions of quality (35% vs 59%), safety (43% vs 73%) and efficiency (17% vs 72%) improved significantly post-intervention. Conclusions Implementation of a receiver-driven intervention to standardise clinic-to-ED handoffs was associated with improved communication quality. These findings suggest that expanded implementation of similar programmes may significantly improve the care of patients transferred to the paediatric ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]