Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
It is rare that the skill of clinical handover (change of shift
report, CoSR) is formally taught or evaluated in any of the
health professions, much less evaluated (in situ) in multidisciplinary care settings. Clinical handover is complex,
cognitively taxing and clinical risks are linked to lack of
clarity. The research is clear that there is room to improve
and that it is a risky time for patients.
What is unclear is what varied anticipatory techniques
healthcare practitioners already use to develop their intuition
and foresight so that they can prospectively manage and cope
with ambiguity and uncertainty, and how they use their
discretionary space in practice.
Both reliability and resilience principles are important to
develop effective CoSR. Handoff strategies from higher
reliability (HR) industries indicate that the three most
important features of effective handovers are ;
Two way face-to-face communication,
written support tools and
Content in handover which captures intention.
These recommendations align with the recommendations
of most healthcare handover research in the last 15 years
While there is ample research describing the problem of
handover in patient safety, much of the research is of poor
quality and proposes simplistic normative solutions such as
'SBAR'.
While standardization and minimum data sets may have
their place, we still need to learn how clinicians create;
foresight, coping strategies and recovery strategies so that
they can better manage efficiency and thoroughness
tradeoffs (ETTO). Resilience Engineering (RE) principles
will help us establish and better describe these prospective,
adaptive and predictive capacities.
Future research should evaluate; first - what techniques
clinicians already use to create foresight during CoSR and,
second- Whether patient safety (preventable adverse events)
is associated with the degree of prospective / anticipatory
communication in the preceding CoSR.
44
RSUM
Il est rare que les aptitudes de relve clinique (rapport de relve
de quart) soient formellement enseignes ou values chez les
professions de la sant, et encore moins values (sur place) dans
des environnements de soins multidisciplinaires. La relve clinique
est complexe, puisante au plan cognitif et le manque de clart
comporte des risques cliniques. Les recherches montrent clairement quil y a place lamlioration et quil sagit dun moment
qui prsente des risques pour les patients.
On ne sait pas clairement quelles sont les diffrentes techniques
d'anticipation dj appliques par les professionnels de la sant pour
dvelopper leur intuition et leur clairvoyance afin dtre en mesure
de grer de manire prospective lambigit et lincertitude et de
composer avec ces lments et de quelle faon ils utilisent leur espace
discrtionnaire en pratique.
Les principes de fiabilit et de rsilience sont galement
importants dans la production des rapports de relve. Les stratgies
de transfert appliques dans les industries haut coefficient de
fiabilit indiquent que les trois lments les plus importants
dun transfert efficace sont :
la communication bidirectionnelle en personne;
les outils de soutien crits;
le contenu du transfert qui saisit lintention.
Ces recommandations sont conformes celles tablies dans la
plupart des tudes sur la relve de quart menes dans le secteur
de la sant au cours des quinze dernires annes. Bien que de
nombreux travaux dcrivent les problmes de scurit du patient
lis au transfert, la plus grande partie de la recherche est de
mauvaise qualit et propose des solutions normatives simplistes,
comme SBAR .
Bien que la standardisation et les ensembles de donnes
minimums puissent avoir leur place, nous devons encore comprendre comment les cliniciens crent les stratgies de prvision,
de compensation et de rcupration afin de mieux grer les
compromis en matire d'efficacit et dintgralit. Les principes
dingnierie de la rsilience nous aideront tablir et mieux
dcrire ces capacits prospectives, adaptatives et prdictives.
Les prochaines recherches devraient valuer dabord les
techniques adoptes par les cliniciens pour tablir une prdiction
durant les rapports de relve, puis dterminer sil existe un lien
entre la scurit des patients (vnements ngatifs vitables) et le
degr de communication prospective / anticipative durant le
processus de relve prcdent.
INTRODUCTION
Patient transfers from one care giver to another are an area
of high safety consequence (Shendell-Falik 2007) and
effective clinical handover is a national patient safety goal
in the USA , Australia and now Canada (JCAHO 2009,
Wong 2008, Accreditation Canada 2008)
Change of shift report (CoSR) is ubiquitous in healthcare.
Hospital inpatient care practitioners such as resident
Physicians, Nurses and Respiratory therapists do this every
shift, (sometimes several times a 'shift') yet it is exceedingly
rare that this skill is even taught or evaluated in any of the
health professions, much less evaluated (in situ) in multidisciplinary care settings. The research that exists on the
subject is clear that there is substantial room for improvement
and that change of shift , and patient care `handovers` are
risky for patients. What is still unclear is what varied
techniques practitioners already use to prospectively manage
this challenge and which might be the most effective and
safe. This review examines the international clinical
handover, or Change of Shift Report (CoSR) literature
from a reliability and resilience engineering perspective to
determine, to what extent these principles are used in healthcare CoSR, and specifically if clinical practitioners can (or do)
use anticipatory techniques to create foresight (and patient
safety) during change of shift report (CoSR) in hospitals.
HOW FORESEEABLE IS PATIENT SAFETY ?
When patients entrust themselves to our care, we make two
implicit, but key professional and organizational promiseswe promise to do everything possible to help patients, to
provide good care; and, we promise not to harm them.
(Reinertsen & Clancy, 2006) The Canadian Adverse
Events Study in 2004, confirmed as other countries have
done, that healthcare is neither inherently safe nor highly
reliable. This retrospective multicenter study found an
overall adverse event (AE) rate of 7.5%, of which 37% were
judged to be potentially preventable and 21% were purportedly related to the cause of unexpected death.
Extrapolating for 2.5 million annual hospitalizations, the
study estimated that 9,000-24,000 preventable deaths
occur from adverse events per year in Canada. (Baker,
Norton, Flintoff, Blais, Brown & Cox, 2004) This study
makes the inference that these adverse events, [judged in
hindsight] may have been foreseeable and therefore preventable. This may not actually be the case because, with
retrospective knowledge of the outcome it is far too easy to
suggest (or judge) what a practitioner could have or should
have done. (Dekker 2006a p.39-44). It is very important
to determine what makes sense to practitioners [from their
lens], in real time, given their limited available cues.
(Dekker 2006a p45-55)
During recent years the significance of the concept of
human error has changed considerably.... It is concluded
that errors cannot be studied as a separate category of
Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy
Revue canadienne de la thrapie respiratoire
45
mindfulness such as ; i) preoccupation with failure, ii) reluctance to simplify interpretations, iii) sensitivity to operations, iv) commitment to resilience and v) deference to
expertise. Within HROs, the commitment to resilience
means that they develop capabilities to detect, contain and
bounce back from those errors that are part of the indeterminate world. (Weick & Sutcliffe 2001 p.14) Resilience
(in HROs) involves a combination of techniques to keep
errors small and involves local improvisation and
workarounds. It also requires a deep knowledge of technology, the system, ones coworkers, ones self and the raw
materials available. (Weick & Sutcliffe 2001 p.14-15)
Herein lies both a similarity and a distinction between
resilience in HRO and Resilience Engineering concepts.
Although there is some overlap these are distinct ideas...
Healthcare`s variability, diversity, limited resources, specialization and ad hoc teams mean that HRO characteristics
such as redundancy and extensive training are simply not
achievable. (Jeffcott 2009a p.257).
Intensive care unit (ICU) care coordination unfolds as
non linear sequence (Miller 2009)
Modern healthcare has been characterized as a complex
adaptive system (CAS) where relationships are critical, are
generally non-linear, and lead to unpredictable dynamics
(Anderson 2005 p.670) A key to understanding the system
as an integrated whole lies in understanding the patterns of
relationships among its agents (Anderson 2005 p.672)
RESILIENCE ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE
Resilience involves anticipation and is an active process
which may be a better match for healthcare settings than
the principles for high reliability because it more effectively
addresses the unique complexities of healthcare (Jeffcott
2009). The emerging concept of resilience moves the
focus away from What went wrong? to Why does it go
right?, and goes beyond simplistic reactions to error-making
toward valuing a proactive focus on error prevention and
recovery (Hollnagel, Nemeth, Dekker 2008). The concept
of resilience in practice may not be new, but our appreciation of it as a technique to; create foresight, cope with
complexity and effectively rescue patients is just emerging.
MANAGING EFFICIENCY THOROUGHNESS TRADEOFFS (ETTO)
Clinicians must actively manage the balance between
efficiency and thoroughness (ETTO), usually favoring
efficiency. (Hollnagel 2009) ..The predominant explanations
that psychologists and engineers attribute performance
failures to, is a mismatch between demand and capacity,
but that they curiously neglect the fundamental fact that
everything takes time, and takes place in time. (Hollnagel
2009 p.26) In addition to the time needed at each stage, is
46
the time needed to make the decision and carry out the
action, plus the uncertainty of adapting to new information
or interruptions. (Hollnagel 2009 p.26-27)
FIGURE 1: Efficiency - Thoroughness Tradeoffs (ETTO) Hollnagel
47
48
TABLE 1 - Review of recent papers on CoSR from reliability and resilience perspectives
Reliability Coding
Calls for
Standardization
Minimum data sets
More training
More measures
SBAR format (or another mnemonics)
ments of effective handovers are; i) Two way communication (preferably face-to- face), ii) Face-to-face handovers
with written support and iii) Content in handover which
captures intention. (Parke &Mishkin 2005)
CRITICAL (HUMAN) FACTORS IN CHANGE OF
SHIFT REPORT (COSR)
Face to face, two way communication
Face to face, two way communication may ensure a
shared mental model. It allows an oncoming worker to
ask questions and to rephrase the material to be handed
over. It enables gestures, eye contact, tones of voice,
degrees of confidence and other redundant, rich
aspects of personal communication to be utilized in
conveying different mental models (Hopkin1980 and
Lardner 1992 in Parke & Miskin 2005)
Face-to-Face Handovers with Written Support
A checklist or a logbook/chart is helpful when reviewed
together by both oncoming and off going staff.
Written material introduces redundancy in the verbal
handover and allows a-priori agreement on key data
(minimum data sets). (Parke & Miskin 2005 p.2)
Content of Handover Captures Intention
Handover works best if communication captures
problems; hypotheses, and intention, rather than simply
lists of occurrences. Perception and memories are
organized by hierarchical goal representations and
these representations in turn drive narrative comprehension, memory and planning. Structure and
function are important, and well intentioned work can
go wrong. Further, shift handover errors have been
attributed to listing work completed (hindsight) rather
than giving a predictive diagnosis of the situation
(foresight). (Parke & Miskin 2005 p.2)
49
sets may have their place, we still need to learn how clinicians create; i) foresight ii) coping strategies, iii) recovery
strategies so that they can better manage efficiency and
thoroughness tradeoffs (ETTO).
Future qualitative research on CoSR should take into
account a practitioners perspectives, resilience, lived experience and micro-situation assessments in real time.
Methods to achieve this might include individual interviews
of; Nurses, Physicians & Respiratory Therapists in both
ICU and Med-Surgical settings to determine from the
practitioners/perspective how they manage efficiencythoroughness tradeoffs during CoSR, and develop skills to;
foresee, cope and adapt to changes they may later experience.
REFERENCES
Accreditation Canada (2008) Qmentum Accreditation Program,
Required Organizational Practice; Patient Safety - Communication;
Accreditation Canada 05/29/2008 http://www.accreditation.ca/
uploadedFiles/information%20transfer.pdf?n=1212
50
Reisenberg,L.,Leitzsch,J,.Massucci,J.L,Jaegar,J.,Rosenfeld,J.C.,
Patow,C.,et al.(2009) Residents and Attending Physicians
Handoffs: A Systematic Review of the Literature Academic Medicine
84(12), pp.1775-1787 Accessed Nov 29/09
http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Abstract/2009/12000
Reisenberg,L.A., Leitzsch,J., Little,B.W.(2009) Systematic Review of
Handoff Mnemonics Literature, American Journal of Medical
Quality 24, 3, May/June
Resilience Engineering Network (2009) http://www.resilienceengineering.org/ (accessed Oct 29,2009)
Shendell-Falik, N., Feinson, M.,.Mohr, B. (2007) Enhancing
Patient Safety: Improving the Patient Handoff Process Through
Appreciative Inquiry The Journal of Nursing Administration
February 2007 - 37 / 2 pp 95-104 accessed July 12.2009 from
http://www.plexusinstitute.org/news-events/show_news.cfm?id=228
Sheps,S.B., Cardiff, K. (2009) Resilience Engineering: A necessary
shift in thinking and practice to improve the management of
patient safety A synthesis report submitted to the Canadian
Health Services Research Foundation ( CHSRF) , Research, Exchange
& Impact for System Support (REISS) competition study RC21785, August 31, 2009
Sheps, S.B. (2009) Resilience (personal communication Vancouver,
Canada Oct 2009)
Turner,P., Wong,M.C.,Yee,K.C. (2006) Understanding interactions of
factors influencing clinical handover; insights for information technology.
Proceedings of the Health Informatics Conference (HIC 2006) Sydney
Australia, downloaded July 10.2009 from http://www.health.gov.au/
internet/safety/publishing.nsf/content/E0B59E130FA90A50CA2573AF
007BC3C8/$File/CHoverLitReview.pdf
CO AUTHOR
APPENDIX 1
CANADIAN HANDOVER STANDARDS
51
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.