Evidence-Based Research Group Project - RN-BSN Portfolio ...



Evidence-Based Nursing Practice Project: Handover Communication

Mary Dewitt, Julie Mooney, and Terri Sand

Ferris State University

Abstract

This paper addresses the nursing clinical practice problem of patient handover between nurses. The study was based on a proposal which identified the clinical practice requiring further research. The group project focused on current and past nursing practices related to this problem. Through rigorous research, research-based findings related to the proposal were presented on the topic through a literature review. A summary of the relevant evidence was represented by four evidence based articles. After critical analysis, a reflection of the group members’ own personal experiences was presented. Recommendations of the group members whether to utilize the research evidence is provided. These recommendations were based on the personal experiences of the group, along with the evidence produced from the research.

Keywords: handover communication, research, evidence, shift reports, SBAR

Evidence-Based Research Group Project

What does the literature reveal about different methods of communication during patient hand-off that promotes safety amongst patients and staff? This is a question that has been addressing an ongoing problem related to nursing handover practice for over 20 years. Current nursing hand-off communication practices are examined in this study. Included in the Evidence-Based Nursing Practice (EBNP) research paper, are reviews of nursing evidence-based articles which examine the issues of nursing hand-off practices. The goal of this research project is to gather nursing-based evidence reflecting the nursing handover process and present areas of concern. A review of the literature is represented by the presentation of four articles which best reflect the evidence related to the project topic. Once literature is presented, an analysis of the evidence will offer suggestions to enhance nursing’s current practice. This appraisal will evaluate the findings of the literature and identify areas of the evidence which are strong or weak. The summary of the evidence, along with a critical appraisal, will also reflect the personal practice experiences of the EBNP group members. Recommendations from the group members, reflecting various influencing factors will describe their opinions whether the research evidence findings should be considered as evidence for practice. These recommendations are based on the group’s experiences as practicing nurses and supported by rationale from the research project.

Description of Four Research Article

Article One

The first research article presented in the EBNP research project is titled “Nursing handover: It’s time for a change”. The research article gives an overview of various studies conducted addressing the adequacy of nursing handover methods and procedures related to giving patient report during the hand-off of patient’s from one nurse to another. It reviews the strengths and limitations of the handover process while examining nurses’ perceptions of the various practices (O’Connell, MacDonald, and Kelly, 2008, p. 2). Additional information presented in the article is gathered from a survey which was conducted amongst nurses working in a metropolitan hospital. The survey reflects their opinions regarding the topic of nursing handover. Many key concerns were identified by the nurses; subjectivity of information being a major concept. Other concerns include repetition of information and the amount of time taken to conduct handover. Identified within the article is the evidence that a review of literature taken from 1984 to the present and a survey. The literature presented within in the article supports that the dilemma of nursing handover practices continues to be an area of concern.

Patient information passed from nurse to nurse during shift change or unit transfers has been conducted by several different methods. These methods include information being handed over verbally, either in person or using a tape recorder, or on a pre-typed handover sheet (O’Connell et al., 2008, p. 3). It is identified in the study that information which is not communicated during nursing shift report can compromise patient safety. Information may be incomplete, omitted, or may not reflect the actual status of the patient. As often as 32 percent of the time, information presented during shift change handover was reported ineffectively or incomplete (O’Connell et al., 2008, p. 4). A commonly used method of reporting is a verbal report. Verbal report can not only be time consuming, but has a potential for the inclusion of irrelevant information. One of the studies presented in the article suggests that 85 percent of the information provided during handover report could potentially be found within existing documentation on the nursing unit (O’Connell, et al., 2008, p. 3). Ten percent of the information exchanged during handover was irrelevant to direct patient care, and included subjective and vague statements (O’Connell, et al., 2008, p. 3). Tape recorded reports can eliminate some of the verbal handover weaknesses but tend to be objective in nature and the information presented is difficult to clarify (O’Connell, et al., 2008, p.3). Although bedside reporting improved time management, documentation, and increased patient contact time, a major disadvantage of bedside handover report is confidentiality. It is difficult to preserve patient confidentiality when relatives and visitors are present, or when patients are placed in multi-bed wards (O’Connell et al., 2008, p. 3). This suggests that conducting a thorough patient handover can also be influenced by the location in which patient report is completed. Although literature reviewed favors no particular method of handover, each type appears to have its own unique strengths and limitations (O’Connell et al., 2008, p. 3).

Along with the comparison of methods of reporting patient information, the article gives an overview of the survey which was used to collect information related to the study topic. The statistical methods of analyzing the information of the survey, and measuring its relevance are explained. The results of the survey are given and displayed in a chart within the article. The survey results are helpful and it presents a good source of information which supports the relevance of the study. The scores of the survey provide evidence pertaining to some of the main issues which were identified during the introduction of the article. The three items with the highest mean scores in the survey were being able to clarify information, being provided with sufficient information, and being able to easily follow information during handover (O’Connell et al., 2008, p. 6). Once the statistical data is explained, the article presents a section which identifies the key strengths and limitations of the study. This makes a good display of pertinent information which further supports the problem presented for the study.

A major point in the article is that poor communication between staff can be a contributing factor to hospital related sentinel events. It states that, “effective communication, including that which takes place during the nursing handover, is pivotal to ensuring patient safety (O’Connell et al., 2008). The relevant objectives of the article “were to examine nurses” perceptions of current handover practices and to determine the strengths and limitations of the handover process (O’Connell et al., 2008). The information resulting from the survey is comparable to the findings of the studies referenced in the article. The issues of incomplete nursing reports and irrelevant patient information are factors which have been associated with sentinel events both recently and historically (O’Connell, et al., 2008, p. 8). It is identified that many of the challenges for handover is to communicate relevant and up-to-date information that is not repeated in other existing documentation.

Developing a method of nursing handover guidelines which considers the issues identified within the study will provide nurses with a useful tool for patient handover. The guidelines should be unit specific in nature which will reinforce the issue of reporting pertinent and relevant information. The evidence-based nursing research provided in the article identifies that the process of nursing handover is a difficult process with multiple issues. The article provides a pertinent resource to assist in addressing the focus of the projects research problem.

Article Two

The article by Staggers and Mowinski-Jennings (2009), “The Content and Context of Change of Shift Report on Medical and Surgical Units”, was developed to evaluate the content and context of change of shift report (COSR) and to indicate whether the use of computerized support is used during the COSR process (Staggers and Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 394). This qualitative report discusses “gaps” in care that can occur when the responsibility of a patient changes hands. The most commonly occurring hand off occurs at change of shift. COSR serves more purposes than mere information exchange “these include social organization, educational and emotional functions” (Staggers & Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 393). Interestingly this article goes on to explain the complexity of this process includes a great deal of knowledge and expertise that is hidden in these exchanges.

Although the importance of change of shift hand off is understood, it is not a topic of recent research. In fact it has been more than a decade since it has been evaluated on medical surgical units. While the implication of the hand off report has been proven to affect patient safety, the evolution of the electronic health record (EHR) has also been advocated to be used during the COSR. Whether nurses use the EHR has also not been investigated, therefore this study also assesses whether nurses use EHRs during report.

Methods used include data collected from seven medical and surgical units in three different facilities. Sampling was guided by purposefully collecting data related to how report was done on different shifts. The units used three report types; audio-taped, bedside, and face-to-face. Reports typically involved only two nurses. Data was collected between September to November 2006. A total of 53 patient’s reports involving 38 nurses were audio-taped and observed with the investigators remaining as unobserved as possible.

The content from these reports clustered into four themes 1) the Dance of Report, 2) Just the Facts, 3) Professional Nursing Practice and 4) Lightening the Load. The Dance of Report reflected the choreography of report “The Dance of Report involved the discernible movements between report partners that were essential to the process of basic human communication” (Staggers & Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 394). Common report types related to this theme included interruptions, and clarifying details. Just the facts included exchanging non controversial, factual patient data requiring no interpretation by the receiver. Professional Nursing Practice included nursing actions along with nursing knowledge combined with care decisions “Data in this theme illustrated how nurses considered patient preferences and acknowledged patients as human beings” (Staggers & Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 395). Lightening the load included thoughtfulness toward other staff, teamwork, smoothing the transition of care from one shift to the next and shared humor and laughter.

Analysis of other observations included determining who on the unit had a sense of the big picture. The effect of noise on the report process and how long it took to find each other to get report on their patients were also analyzed. Tools for receiving and giving report were evaluated. The tools that were evaluated included 3x5 cards, spreadsheets, and the use of EHR. Report styles and the amount and type of interruptions were also evaluated.

Results of the analysis included possible discontinuities in care and lack of formality in report. COSR content was often informal, unstructured, and heavily reliant upon nurses memories. Use of EHR’s were not used routinely even in facilities that contain a mature EHR. Administrators are urged to develop consistent structure for report that could improve information completeness and accuracy and serve as a framework for nurses to organize disparate information. Consistent structure would allow speakers and listeners to anticipate content.

Article Three

Electronic health records are another method with great potential to improve communication of relevant information during the handover process. The World Health Organization (WHO), the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO), and other regulatory bodies are promoting the use of electronic records to improve communication in today’s healthcare (Staggers, Clark, Blaz, & Kapsandoy, 2012). The article by Staggers et al., 2012, “Nurses’ Information Management and Use of Electronic Tools during Acute Care Handoffs”, discusses nurse information management for preparation of handover and the usage of electronic records during the handover process. Past studies have mainly focused on nurses’ perception on handoffs in general. The two published studies found on computerized handoffs, the one by researcher Kalisch et al (2007), revealed a positive perception by nurses while the other study discussed a generic template not built in with the patient electronic health record. With only those two published studies, the researchers determine a noticeable need in gaining findings to be used to inform and aid future electronic designs (Staggers et al., 2012).

This qualitative study by Stagger et al., (2012) focused on nurse information management and usage of electronic health record. This article discussed in detail, a study completed in the United States that observed “93 handoffs by 26 nurses on five medical/surgical unit in two western hospitals with a robust electronic health record” (Staggers et al., 2012, p. 153). The exploratory study was detailed, concise, organized, and exhibited appropriate logic to help “fill the gaps” and generating concepts for nursing applying computer technology to improve communication during handover process. The research concepts concerning nurse information management were clearly identified in the study and organized into five themes: “good nurse expectations, paper forms are best, information at a glance, only pertinent information please, and information tools that work” (Staggers et al., 2012, p. 160). Researchers’ strict adherence to detail during data analysis provided strong and reliable evidence. The researchers verified the data with the assistance of audio-recorded handoffs, maintenance of field notes, as well as interview with the nurses discussing their practice and tools for handoff. From the data analysis, some relevant information was discovered about nursing gathering information of report and the utilization of electronic health record for handover process. The most significant outcome of the study revealed nurses continue to rely on paper handoff forms for cognitive support. Nurses claimed the paper forms are their “brains” for caring and transferring care of patient to the next nurse (Staggers et al., 2012). According to Staggers et al., (2012) “Nearly two thirds of nurses used personal, paper handoff forms instead of the available computerized nursing summary report highly supported by institutional leaders” although electronic health record computers were easily accessible while giving report (p.170). Nurses admitted ease of writing pertinent information on paper verses computer and customizing patient report to the patient as well as their own needs. The other third of nurses used a printed summary report from the patient electronic health record and added other pertinent information as needed.

From this study, it is evident the electronic tools available today need renovating. This study was significantly relevant for nursing practice and identifies valid points that need further study or changes to impact effective handover processes. Variable individual style and contextual needs of nurses will need to be addressed to provide customization of a practice tool. An electronic handover process that works for one unit may not work for another such as a generic standardization handoff tool. The technology will need easy accessibility and portability. Nurses will need further education and support on the new technology expected from leadership. It is apparent from this study that future selection and building of electronic health record designs, additional studies will require input from nurse informatics, clinical nurse leaders, and staff to enhance the success of this “complex, interactive process critical to safe patient care” (Staggers et al., 2012, p. 170).

Article Four

The article by Caruso (2007), “The Evolution of Nurse-to Nurse Bedside Report on a Medical-Surgical Cardiology Unit”, offers an alternative, interactive, process for hand-off communication. The strategy of bedside reporting is to transfer critical, relevant information in the presence of outgoing and oncoming nurse, as well as the patient. This type of handover has come to the forefront most recently because of recommendations from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) National Patient Safety Goals (Caruso, 2007). Research has shown benefits of bedside reporting are vast. Interaction between staff nurses provides accountability with direct observation. Bedside reports have shown to improve communication, safety, and satisfactions amongst patient and staff nurses (Laws & Amato, 2010).

This pilot study was conducted in a 206 bed hospital on a medical-surgical cardiology unit. The author of this project was inspired to implement this project after attending a presentation by the Arizona Nurses Association. The central purpose for this project was to enhance patient safety and quality of care by promoting nurse to nurse communication and nurse to patient communication (Caruso, 2007). The handover process prior to implementation on this unit included verbal report to the oncoming nurse at the nurses’ station without support of a standardized tool. Validation from review of literature and a site visit to a hospital with bedside handovers in place, confirmed their theory to change the handover process. Benefits displayed from research on nurse to nurse bedside reporting included patient involvement and empowerment, team approach, and compliance with JCAHO standards (Caruso, 2007). The strength of the project was demonstrated by utilizing Lewin’s (1951) Model of Change, which will provide the project a conceptual framework that will aid and guide this process of changing handover from traditional reporting at the nurse’s station to reporting at the bedside (Caruso, 2007).

“Where a major change in the style or structure of handover is implemented, models such as Lewin’s (1951) model of unfreezing, changing and refreezing can be a useful guide to change” (McMurray, Chaboyer, Wallis, & Fetherston, 2009, p. 2582). This process identifies the forces that can bring about a group’s willingness to change and its continual resolution (McMurray et al., 2009).

During the first stage, Unfreezing, Caruso (2007) identified the need for change in the handover process. Meetings with the seventy five nurses from the unit included introducing the concept of bedside report and actively listening to voiced concerns. Recruitment of nurses for the implementation team also took place. During Lewin’s second stage, the Moving Stage, planning and implementing occurred. The process of bedside reporting was carefully plan to include opportunity for patient dialogue, a standardized report template to ensure consistency, and integrating other safety measure like checking two patient identifiers during the handover process. To overcome some of the challenges of the new process, the implementation team was supportive and available for questions and reeducation of nurses if they returned to their old handover process. Some creative techniques were used to promote success of the new handover included role playing. Lewin’s third stage, the Refreezing Stage includes monitoring and integrating the change into practice. A third meeting was held after one month after integrating into their practice to discuss the new process. Concerns and benefits alike were voiced. Communication challenges were identified, including staff feeling uncomfortable giving report in front of patients and difficulty giving timely reports. Advantages of bedside reporting were identified including discovering infiltrated and low intravenous infusions and chest tubes requiring reposition. Also, nurses reported the new process often took less time and oncoming nurses expressed satisfaction of seeing their patients early, during bedside report. Analysis of the pilot study showed patients and families positively reported appreciation of knowing the plan of care, ability to actively participate in their care, as well as meeting their nurse at the change of care (Caruso, 2007). This pilot study offers a practical conceptual framework that could be applicable for many nursing units. Change of processes can be difficult and complex. Many challenges were identified and required processes to be modified. This article continues to demonstrate the complexity of handoff communication. To facilitate and sustain a change as complex as the handover process, it is evident it will require motivation, a positive attitude, diligence, supportive leadership and willingness to change.

Critical Appraisal Of The Evidence

Article One

The article begins with an abstract which addresses the main focus of the study. It states the problem then expands by explaining the purpose for the study. It is stated that the intention of the study is to determine the strengths and limitations of the handover process. Several examples of nursing handover methods along with their strengths and limitations are presented. The material is relevant to the stated problem, it is referenced, but it is not specifically titled as the Literature Review section. Because the study lacks a formally identified theory and framework, it makes it difficult to evaluate whether the study produces material that can be reproduced or applied to specific concepts. It is useful to view the survey results and comments made by the nurses being interviewed. This information is helpful to compare to the study’s objectives, which are clearly stated at the end of the introduction section. The study results identify the key strengths and limitations during the handover process of patients. It identifies the key concepts which should be included in a handover report, and it identifies recommendations for the development of unit specific handover guidelines. Although the study is weak in structure, it does present useful evidence which supports the need for further research on the topic. It provides evidence that a problem exists related to nursing handover and the development of a reliable method for patient care handover is overdue.

Article Two

After analyzing this study it is important to decide whether the objectives are met. As previously mentioned the objectives were to describe current content and context of change of shift report on medical and surgical units and to determine the use of computerized support. As this is a comparative descriptive design’ this study examines differences in variables in two or more groups that occur naturally in a setting. “A descriptive design may be used to develop theories, identify problems with current practice, justify current practice, make judgments, or determine what other nurses in similar situation are doing” (Burns & Grove, 2011, p. 256). This study clearly discusses the purpose of the study as a commonly occurring hand off that could contribute to gaps in care (Staggers & Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 393). This quantitative research study was designed to gain information about characteristics within the nursing practice and it proves the complexity of the hand off reporting experience. The methods used to obtain data were effective however study limitations include a limited number of locations observed, and regional data may reflect different content and contexts for report in different regions of the country. This study does not take into consideration the Joint Commission guidelines using the Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation structure. The importance of a structured reporting process is clearly identified.

Article Three

Staggers and colleagues (2011) presented a thorough comprehensive study on nurses’ organization and management of information for handover process findings on the overall usage of electronic tools during the process (Staggers et al., 2012). This study addresses one of nursing research priorities significant to build an evidence-based practice for nursing (Burns & Grove, 2011). The purpose statement was well written and indicated an area that is understudied and provided a basis for the research. Approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) was obtained to validate authenticity and ethicality of study. A conceptual framework was clearly linked to nurses’ thought process and work flow practice. To fully understand nurses’ information management style for collecting information for the handover process, the researchers honed in on significant nursing practices applicable to it.

This qualitative study demonstrated strict adherence to guidelines in an attempt to avoid bias and manipulation while maintaining validity throughout the process. The researchers provided a strong, detailed data analysis proving evidence of a rigorous process. Analysis of the data was coded into thirty three categories and five themes and strictly examined by all three researchers in the study. Breaking nursing practice by the codes and themes identified a clear procedure for identifying pertinent theories for the lack of usage of electronic tools for patient handoff.

This study provided credible, useful evidence and was organized, logical and was easy to read. This study will provide researchers with valuable information to aid in future electronic designs. It is evident there is an essential need in research on handovers utilizing technology including electronic health records. Findings from this study echoed loudly for utilization of the electronic tool for handover to be a success, the technology will need to include contextually based information, flexibility, and easy accessibility.

Article Four

Complying with JCAHO National Safety goals for effective hand off communications was the catalyst for this project in this acute care hospital cardiology unit. The intention to enhance patient safety and improving effective communication by implementing bedside shift reports was clearly stated by the author in an area which has proven to be understudied. Caruso’s (2007) research of literature, listening and interviewing speakers from a national conference, and visiting hospital site with bedside reporting supported the purpose as well as the approach to this study.

Usage of Lewin’s Change Model as the framework to guide the implementation of bedside reporting from traditional reporting was very clear. Throughout the study, Caruso (2007) explicitly relates the conceptual framework and pilot study which increases the reader’s trustworthiness and value of study. The participants in the study appear to have a trusting relationship with the implementing team and researcher. Data collection was strengthened by frequent meetings, interviews, and direct observations of the nursing staff.

Limitations of the study were evident as well. Strong motivation by the author and implementation team could subject themselves and participants to bias during the Moving and Freezing Stage. Recruitment of nurses by purposive sampling instead of random selection may affect total representation of nurses’ willingness to change. The data presented did not appear complete with only highlights of findings represented.

New information from this study was limited. With so many changes needed to implement a successful bedside handover report for this cardiology unit, it is clear that there is need for further studies to ensure a smooth, complete, effective handoff. Caruso (2007) described nursing handover process best. “Nurses view report as a “sacred cow” and the challenges when attempting to change this process cannot be underestimated” (Caruso, 2007, p. 21).

How the Evidence is Affected By Your Experiences

Research group project nurses have experienced each of the types of hand off reporting that have been explored in the preceding report. Those that have experienced audio-taped reports seemed to find them effective, as they were concise, detailed and uninterrupted. They often included report for all the patients on the floor which lead to a unified floor staff. Taped reports also reduce the time it takes to locate nurses for report. These types of reports seemed especially effective in medical surgical unit.

As indicated in the research analyzed, these types of reports were only as effective as the nurse who gives the report. A lack of a structured reporting process can lead to incomplete unorganized and misleading information. Oncoming nurses often did not have the opportunity to ask questions if information is incomplete or if poor quality in recording has occurred as the outgoing nurse had already left.

Verbal reports are the most common type of handover process experienced by the nurses in this report. Although verbal reports are used in most health care settings they are most effective in fast paced hand-off such as those experienced in the peri-anesthesia area. Nurses have generally one or two patients at a time and patients are only with that nurse a relatively short period of time. Verbal reports concentrate only on pertinent information and are fast paced.

Although this type of report is most common, there are many problems with it. As with other forms of report, it is as comprehensive as the nurse who gives the report. The format, style, length and completeness are generally a matter of training and tradition. This form of report is subject to interruptions, stalling and environmental noise. Nurses in hospital settings as experienced by the authors spend much of report time finding report partners and attending to patient needs during report thus creating a disjointed report.

Bedside report has become increasingly popular form of reporting and for one author it has become a matter of policy. This report process is similar to verbal report but adds the patient in the process. This form of report also allows both nurses to exchange vital information face to face and clarify and pertinent questions. This experience has contributed to accountability and patients become aware of their progress and can ask questions. Many institutions even encourage patients to participate in their plan of care. Bedside report can be applied effectively to the Labor/Delivery area also where assessment, patient update, and report can be done simultaneously. This gives the nurse an opportunity for visual assessment.

The drawbacks to bedside report are similar to verbal report as stated earlier. Individual nurses have individual styles of report this possible lack of structure can cause omissions in information. There is time lost in finding oncoming nurses as in other forms of report and it is also subject to interruptions, stalling and environmental noise. This style of report requires safeguards to ensure patient privacy to be compliant with HIPPA (Health Care Information Privacy and Portability act).

Electronic health records have become a necessary and invaluable tool for nurses. Most nurses either chart electronically or have access to electronic health information. The trend is to have all health information eventually available electronically. This leads us to question whether hand off report should be done completely electronically. As indicated in the research 30% of hand off report is factual information that can be obtained from accessing computer charting (Staggers & Mowinski-Jennings, 2009, p. 496). As experienced nurses, we also know however that electronic charting is only as good as the person who entering the data. This of course leads us back to designing a format and structure that would include all pertinent information such as an electronic SBAR. The other drawback would be designing a computer system that is as quick and convenient as real time information that allows for portability.

Make Recommendations

Considering the factors identified in the research and reflecting on the personal experiences of the group, our group recommends, unit specific change of shift reporting. Each of the types of report identified has its strengths and weaknesses therefore the development of a single tool for handover may not be the answer. Therefore, handoff methods should be customized to meet the needs of the patient and the unit. However the use of a handoff tool such as SBAR should be used as a means to focus and format the content of report as this was a common drawback to each of the reporting methods according to the research. The use of handoff methods can be customized to meet the needs of the unit also. The study used in our research did use a unit specific standardized hand off report form during the bedside report that enhanced the whole process. It was clear, future studies definitely needed to refine this process. Bedside report is the only form of handoff process that addresses (JCAHO) National Patient Safety Goals.

The research has indicated that the complexity of hand-off reporting involves many components including social components. The implementation of unit specific hand off tools would and should change the culture of this very important nursing function. This group also recommends the use of EHR as an adjunct to hand-off reporting as this also contains pertinent information that address factual components to patient care.

Finally this group recognizes the need for further research in this subject as the research identifies a need to enhance patient safety. The expansion of EHR and the recommendation of the SBAR handoff tool need to be more completely explored as past and current literature lack scientific merit; this is why further studies are needed to identify evidence based practice in the handover process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is imperative that a patient handover process is developed. This has been a long term challenge for nurses. The implementation of a handover process which is diverse and adaptable to individual patients specifically is long overdue. Evidence from past practices and the future, support the importance of an infallible method of patient reporting. Ineffective communication methods are a key factor leading to adverse events within the hospital setting.

References

Anderson C Mangino R 2006 Nurse Shift Report Who Says You Can't Talk in Front of the Patient?Anderson, C., & Mangino, R. (2006). Nurse Shift Report: Who Says You Can't Talk in Front of the Patient? Nursing Administration Quarterly, 30(2), 112-122.

Ardoin K Broussard L 2011 Implementing Handoff Communication.Ardoin, K., & Broussard, L. (2011). Implementing Handoff Communication. Journal for Nurses

Beckett C Kipnis G 2009 Collaborative Communication: Integrating SBAR to Improve Quality/Patient Safety Outcomes.Beckett, C., & Kipnis, G. (2009). Collaborative Communication: Integrating SBAR to Improve Quality/Patient Safety Outcomes. Journal for Healthcare Quality, 31(5), 19-28.

Burns N Grove S 2011 Understanding Nursing Research: Building an Evidence-Based PracticeBurns, N., & Grove, S. (2011). Understanding Nursing Research: Building an Evidence-Based Practice (5th ed.). Maryland Heights, MO: Elsevier Saunders.

in Staff Development, 27(3), 128-135.

Caruso E 2007 Evolution of Nurse-Nurse Bedside Report on a Medical-Surgical Cardiology Unit.Caruso, E. (2007). The Evolution of Nurse-Nurse Bedside Report on a Medical-Surgical Cardiology Unit. MedSurg Nursing , 16(1), 17-22.

Laws D Amato S 2010 Incorporating Bedside Reporting into Change-of-Shift Report.Laws, D., & Amato, S. (2010). Incorporating Bedside Reporting into Change-of-Shift Report. Rehabilitation Nursing, 35(2), 70-74.

Matic J Davidson P Salamonson Y 2010 Review: bringing patient safety to the forefront through structured computerisation during clinical handover.Matic, J., Davidson, P., & Salamonson, Y. (2010). Review: bringing patient safety to the forefront through structured computerisation during clinical handover. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20, 184-189. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03242.x

McMurray A Chaboyer W Wallis M Fetherston C 2009 Implementing bedside handover: strategies for change management.McMurray, A., Chaboyer, W., Wallis, M., & Fetherston, C. (2009). Implementing bedside handover: strategies for change management. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19, 2580-2589. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03033.x

O'Connell, B., MacDonald, K., & Kelly, C. (2008). Nursing handover: It's time for a

change. Contemporary Nurse, 30, 2-11.

Olvera L Campbell B 2010 Perfecting the Patient Handoff: Improving the process for Patients and Nurses.Olvera, L., & Campbell, B. (2010). Perfecting the Patient Handoff: Improving the process for Patients and Nurses. Nursing for Womens Health, 14(6), 496-504.

Ong M BiomedE M Coiera E 2011 Systematic Review of Failures in Handoff Communication During Intrahospital Transfers.Ong, M., BiomedE, M., & Coiera, E. (2011). A Systematic Review of Failures in Handoff Communication During Intrahospital Transfers. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 37(6), 274-284.

Reisenberg L Leitzsch J Little B 2009 Systematic Review of Handoff Mnemonics Literature.Reisenberg, L., Leitzsch, J., & Little, B. (2009). Systematic Review of Handoff Mnemonics Literature. American Journal of Medical Quality, 24(3), 196-204. doi:10.1177/1062860609332512

Staggers N Clark L Blaz J Kapsandoy S 2012 Nurses' Information Management and Use of Electronic Tools During Acute Care Handoffs.Staggers, N., Clark, L., Blaz, J., & Kapsandoy, S. (2012). Nurses' Information Management and Use of Electronic Tools during Acute Care Handoffs. Western Journal of Nursing Research 2012, 34(2), 153-173. doi:10.1177/0193945911407089

Staggers, N., & Mowinski-Jennings, B. (2009, September). The Content and Context of Change of Shift Report on Medical and Surgical Units. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 39(9), 393-398.

Riesenberg L Leitzsch J Cunningham J 2010 Nursing Handoffs: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Strople B Ottani P 2006 Can Technology Improve Intershift Report? What the Research Reveals.Strople, B., & Ottani, P. (2006). Can Technology Improve Intershift Report? What the Research Reveals. Journal of Professional Nursing, 22(3), 197-204. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2006.03.007

Riesenberg L Leitzsch J Cunningham J 2010 Nursing Handoffs: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Riesenberg, L., Leitzsch, J., & Cunningham, J. (2010). Nursing Handoffs: A Systematic Review of the Literature. American Journal of Nursing, 110(4), 24-34.

Welsh C Flanagan M Ebright P 2010 Barriers and Facilitators to nursing handoffs: Recommendations for redesign.Welsh, C., Flanagan, M., & Ebright, P. (2010). Barriers and Facilitators to nursing handoffs: Recommendations for redesign. Nursing Outlook, 58(3), 148-154. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2009.10.005

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download