Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of a Protocol Recommendation System (PRS) automatic protocolling of chest CT imaging requests. Materials and Methods: 322 387 consecutive historical imaging requests for chest CT between 2017 and 2022 were extracted from a radiology information system (RIS) database containing 16 associated patient information values. Records with missing fields and protocols with <100 occurrences were removed, leaving 18 protocols for training. After freetext pre-processing and applying CLEVER terminology word replacements, the features of a bag-of-words model were used to train a multinomial logistic regression classifier. Four readers protocolled 300 clinically executed protocols (CEP) based on all clinically available information. After their selection was made, the PRS and CEP were unblinded, and the readers were asked to score their agreement (1 = severe error, 2 = moderate error, 3 = disagreement but acceptable, 4 = agreement). The ground truth was established by the readers' majority selection, a judge helped break ties. For the PRS and CEP, the accuracy and clinical acceptability (scores 3 and 4) were calculated. The readers' protocolling reliability was measured using Fleiss' Kappa. Results: Four readers agreed on 203/300 protocols, 3 on 82/300 cases, and in 15 cases, a judge was needed. PRS errors were found by the 4 readers in 1%, 2.7%, 1%, and 0.7% of the cases, respectively. The accuracy/clinical acceptability of the PRS and CEP were 84.3%/98.6% and 83.0%/99.3%, respectively. The Fleiss' Kappa for all readers and all protocols was 0.805. Conclusion: The PRS achieved similar accuracy to human performance and may help radiologists master the ever-increasing workload.

Recent studies on handover communication highlight the role of the incoming physician in preventing misunderstandings that contribute to medical errors. However, existing research often only provides abstract recommendations for increasing their participation, without specifying where and how this should occur. This paper applies discourse theory and methods to identify where the incoming physician's active involvement is interactionally appropriate and can be integrated naturally and effectively. Twelve handovers between six pairs of resident physicians were recorded in a simulated ICU setting at a teaching hospital and analyzed using a combination of genre theory and conversation analysis. By first identifying the "moves" that constitute the handover genre, we pinpointed places where active participation by the incoming physician is expected and facilitates effective communication. While the tasks and focus points and the questions and consultation moves clearly invite such participation, the clinical situation move requires more negotiation, as the outgoing physician maintains control over the conversational floor, making it less immediately accessible for the incoming physician to contribute. The four remaining moves exhibit a more monologic pattern, where both participants display interactional behavior signaling that active input from the incoming physician is not anticipated. Our findings suggest that medical professionals share an implicit understanding of when participation is appropriate, shaped by conventions of the handover genre itself. By reconstructing these tacit rules through genre theory and conversation analysis, we provide insights that can inform training methods, ensuring that recommendations for active participation by the incoming physician align with the structured expectations of clinical practice.

Surgical handover remains a high-risk process with no gold standard for practice despite 20 years of available guidance. Variability in practice is common, and poorly performed handover poses significant, yet avoidable, risk to patients. Research in this domain is underfunded with widely heterogenous methodology, meaning that the evidence base for better handover is deficient. In this correspondence, recommendations are made to address these shortcomings, including standardised operating procedures supported by electronic health records to enable staff training and audit. Prioritisation of the sickest patients at the handover outset and two-way, verbal communication, including a "read-back" to confirm that information is both transmitted and received. Rigorous evaluation of handover interventions before use, and discontinuation of practices that add no value. Lastly, a core outcome set for surgical handover is urgently needed to improve the comparability of studies. By clearly defining best practices and demonstrating the impact of interventions on patient outcomes, surgeons will be more inclined to adopt meaningful improvements in handover processes.

Background The I-PASS bundle is a standardized care handoff associated with improved outcomes that is widely used in residency training. Sustainable use of I-PASS bundle components among attending hospital medicine providers merits further study. After we implemented a handoffs pilot process including written handoffs and Epic chat message (surrogate for verbal handoff) based on the I-PASS protocol, providers reported high levels of satisfaction. However, the pilot tool was utilized infrequently, and use ceased after the pilot. Methodology We utilized qualitative methods to assess attending physicians' and Advanced Practice Providers' perceptions to understand discrepancies between perceived utility and actual use. From February to March 2022, we interviewed 13 attending hospitalist physicians (n = 11) and Advanced Practice Providers (n = 2) individually or in homogenous focus groups; we transcribed recordings for qualitative coding (interrater agreement was κ = 0.82). We coded and analyzed the textual data via the specific concerns participants shared in the interviews and focus groups. Results Participants felt that while the I-PASS-based tool was suboptimal, the pilot raised overall awareness and use of handoff processes. They recommended that feasible handoff processes provide necessary information quickly for cross-cover providers, but do not require similar details for stable patients. Most participants reported that existing electronic medical record chat functions along with notes were adequate and more efficient. They also recommended standardizing format and processes; obtaining buy-in from all patient care providers; education on efficient use of tools; and formal, explicit expectations that providers complete handoffs. Conclusions Handoffs are an important component of patient safety measures. While they perceived the I-PASS-based tool to be suboptimal in several aspects, participants felt that the handoff quality improvement pilot raised overall awareness and use of handoff processes, which they felt was important for patient safety. Implementation of I-PASS bundle components may require contextual adaptation.

Communication errors are the main cause of adverse events in emergency medicine, underscoring the importance of patient handover conversations. This study aims to assess the impact of implementing the ISOBAR handover protocol for patient transfer between emergency medical services and emergency department (ED) personnel.

We conducted a single-center implementation trial to evaluate the ISOBAR handover protocol efficacy in a German university hospital ED. We observed and analyzed 651 handover conversations involving adult patients, comparing those using the ISOBAR protocol to those following standard procedure without the protocol. Direct observation of handover processes was employed during alternating interventional periods across 6 trial phases. Primary outcome measure was the "Key Information Transfer Efficiency" score (KITE), a higher score indicating a more efficient patient handover conversation. Secondary outcome measure was the retention of key information by ED personnel, indicating successfully conveyed information.

The KITE score was significantly higher in the ISOBAR group (difference 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.22), showing a notable increase from baseline without ISOBAR to the final trial phase using ISOBAR (difference 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-0.34). Key information retention increased significantly: +18% for physicians (95% CI 9-28) and +19% (95% CI 10-28) for nurses. The number of questions asked after handover decreased by 29% (95% CI 5.81-41.46). The adherence to ISOBAR had no notable effect on outcome measures.

The implementation of ISOBAR can enhance information transfer during handover. However, adherence to ISOBAR was not crucial, highlighting the importance of focusing on quality of communication during patient handover.

Background Currently no guidelines exist for the development of surgical handover educational curricula. This critical review synthesises the relevant literature to identify best approaches to handover education and develop an evidence-based framework for teaching and assessing surgical handover skills. Methods The following resources were critically reviewed by two independent researchers to identify key educational components; (1) all published studies primarily utilising an educational intervention to improve surgical handover up to May 2023, (2) key international guidelines and (3) reviews of all handover interventions published within the last 10 years. Results A total of eight comparative studies, two systematic reviews, and four handover guidelines were included. Findings were reported across eight domains; including educational setting, approach, format, content, resources used, assessment, student feedback, and follow-up training. A framework for developing surgical handover curricula was also reported. Conclusion The reported educational framework or 'blueprint' aims to assist educators across multiple settings to develop evidence-based surgical handover curricula for undergraduate and postgraduate learners. Future studies need to achieve higher Kirkpatrick levels to demonstrate both effectiveness and sustainability of educational interventions, ensuring safer patient care.

Diagnostic errors in emergency departments (ED) are a significant concern and exacerbated by cognitive biases during patient handoffs. The timing and accuracy of disclosing working diagnoses during these handoffs potentially influence diagnostic decisions, yet empirical evidence remains limited.

This parallel, quasi-experimental study involved 40 interns from Japanese teaching hospitals, randomly assigned to control or intervention groups. Each group reviewed eight audio-recorded patient handoff scenarios where working diagnoses were disclosed at the start (control) or end (intervention). Four cases presented correct diagnoses, while four featured incorrect ones. The main measure was diagnostic error rate, calculated as the proportion of incorrect post-handoff responses to total questions asked.

No significant difference in diagnostic error rates emerged between the control (39.4 %, 63/160) and intervention (38.8 %, 62/160) groups (point estimate -0.6 %; 95 % CI: -11.3-10.1 %, p=0.91). However, a substantial difference was evident between diagnostic errors after correct (20.6 %, 33/160) and incorrect (57.5 %, 92/160) working diagnoses presented (point estimate: 36.9 %; 95 % CI: 27.0-46.8 %, p<0.001). Diagnostic momentum accounted for 52 % (48/92) of errors under incorrect diagnoses.

While the timing of working diagnosis disclosure did not significantly alter diagnostic accuracy during ED handoffs, exposure to incorrect diagnoses markedly increased error rates. These findings underscore the imperative to refine diagnostic skills and reconsider ED handoff protocols to mitigate cognitive biases and optimize patient care outcomes.

Background: Effective documentation and coding in health care are crucial for patient care, safety, workflow improvement and accurate billing. Objectives: This quality improvement study aimed to enhance History and Physical (H&P) note documentation and charge capture processes to integrate coding and billing aspects, capture authentic work, preserve the H&P's integrity and align H&P-related revenue with actual performance. Method: A multidisciplinary team, including divisional leadership and specialists in documentation improvement, electronic health records, lean/six sigma methodology, a nocturnist and a senior-level physician coding auditor, initiated a quality improvement project. Educational efforts targeted approximately 50 hospitalists at a Departmental meeting in January 2023 (Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine), followed by the development and iterative testing of a standardised H&P note template in March 2023, officially disseminated to the entire Department in June 2023. Results: Despite limited impact from education alone, the implementation of an updated H&P template in May 2023 and department-wide distribution in June led to an immediate increase in average work relative value units (wRVU) per encounter, driven by enhanced capture of prolonged time codes and key medical decision-making phrases. The sustained correlation between template usage and increased wRVUs demonstrated a consistent, elevated plateau compared to the education phase. Conclusion: Collaboratively designed and user-informed note templates, balancing usability, efficiency and revenue-generating elements, proved more effective than education alone in integrating complex changes into clinical practice and enhancing coding and billing accuracy. Implications: Results of this study underscore the benefits of standardised documentation tools in enhancing both clinical and financial outcomes, suggesting that healthcare institutions could improve revenue capture, and documentation accuracy by adopting similar approaches.

Interdisciplinary long-term health surveillance identifies opportunities to mitigate CDH-related multisystem morbidity, particularly in patients with neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI). However, no studies to date have assessed the impact of these morbidities on the patient/family. Our aim was to describe the clinical trajectory of patients with CDH and NDI (CDH-NDI), and to explore the lived experience and satisfaction of families with existing support resources.

A multi-phase explanatory study (REB 2023-8964) was conducted. Phase 1: Review of clinical data for CDH-NDI patients attending a longitudinal follow-up clinic; Phase 2: Satisfaction assessment of CDH-NDI families with existing hospital resources. Standard statistical analyses were performed for Phases 1 and 2, respectively.

Of 91 patients included, 27 had NDI, stratified into mild (n = 2), moderate (n = 7), and severe (n = 18) cohorts. Ventilation (16 vs. 8; p < 0.001), ICU (34 vs. 18; p < 0.001) and hospital (41 vs. 22; p < 0.001) days were significantly longer in the severe cohort. The severe cohort required significantly more unscheduled visits, particularly in the first four years of life (p < 0.05). Despite high family satisfaction with existing resources, team communication during ICU-ward transfers could be improved. Parents also desired to share experiences with other CDH families.

CDH children with NDI require increased support, particularly in the first four years of life. While clinic satisfaction is high, improvement of team communication and access to support resources remain high priorities for parents.

Level II (prospectively collected data, retrospective analysis).

As medical schools move to integrate the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency (EPAs) into curricula and address the transition from student to resident, residency preparatory courses have become more prevalent. The authors developed an experiential learning EPA-based capstone course for assessment to determine impact on learner self-assessed ratings of readiness for residency and acquisition of medical knowledge. All fourth-year students from the classes of 2018-2020 completed a required course in the spring for assessment of multiple EPAs, including managing core complaints, performing basic procedures, obtaining informed consent, and providing patient handoffs. Learners selected between three specialty-based parallel tracks - adult medicine, surgery, or pediatrics. Students completed a retrospective pre-post questionnaire to provide self-assessed ratings of residency preparedness and comfort in performing EPAs. Finally, the authors studied the impact of the course on knowledge acquisition by comparing student performance in the adult medicine track on multiple choice pre- and post-tests. Four hundred and eighty-one students were eligible for the study and 452 (94%) completed the questionnaire. For all three tracks, there was a statistically significant change in learner self-assessed ratings of preparedness for residency from pre- to post-course (moderately or very prepared: adult medicine 61.4% to 88.6% [p-value < 0.001]; surgery 56.8% to 81.1% [p-value < 0.001]; pediatrics 32.6% to 83.7% [p-value 0.02]). A similar change was noted in all tracks in learner self-assessed ratings of comfort from pre- to post-course for all studied EPAs. Of the 203 students who participated in the adult medicine track from 2019-2020, 200 (99%) completed both the pre- and post-test knowledge assessments. The mean performance improved from 65.0% to 77.5% (p-value < 0.001). An experiential capstone course for the assessment of EPAs can be effective to improve learner self-assessed ratings of readiness for residency training and acquisition of medical knowledge.

Prior reviews have shown that interventions to improve inpatient handoffs are inconsistently associated with improvement in patient outcomes. This systematic review examines the effectiveness of inpatient handoff interventions on outcomes affecting patients and physicians, including objective measures when reported (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022309326).

Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched on January 13th, 2022. We included experimental or quasi-experimental studies that examined handoff communication between inpatient physicians and reported patient clinical, patient experiential, physician experiential, or cost and utilization outcomes. Studies were excluded if they examined handoffs between facilities or levels of care, or only reported subjective measures of patient safety or physician experience. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-1 and RoB-2 tools.

Of the 42 included studies, six were randomized controlled trials. Most studies were conducted at academic centers (67%) and involved only residents (64%). An educational intervention was used in 52% of studies and a structural intervention was used in 43%, with 9% using both. Adverse events were significantly improved in three of 16 studies, medical errors in three of seven studies, and length of stay in three of seven studies. Four studies examined mortality, and none reported a significant improvement. Studies that used both structural and educational components reported significant improvements more frequently.

The literature is mixed on the impact of efforts to improve handoffs, though there are few randomized trials. Few studies reported patient experiential or cost/utilization outcomes, or involved hospitalist physicians, which represent potential areas for future research.

To develop and validate the content of checklists for safe admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

A methodological study conducted between 2018 and 2020 in four stages: 1) literature review; 2) checklist construction; 3) content validity by 32 neonatal nursing specialists from different Brazilian states, predominantly from the southeastern region; 4) development of the final version of the instruments. Validity was performed using a Likert-type scale. Items with a Content Validity Index of 0.90 or higher were accepted. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

The contents of two checklists were constructed and validated: one for admission, with 18 items, and another for discharge, with seven items. For the admission checklist, 41.03% of items were validated in the first round, 33.33%, in the second, and 23.08%, in the third. One item was excluded for not achieving the minimum Content Validity Index (>0.90). For the discharge checklist, all items achieved a CVI ≥ 0.90, with 64.7% validated in the first round and 35.3% in the second round. No items were excluded.

The content of patient safety checklists for admission and discharge in Neonatal Intensive Care Units was considered valid.

Handoffs are a major determinant of patient's safety but their implementation remains heterogeneous and non-standardized. Organizational factors, including the order in which individual cases are handled within the handoff, may play a role in their quality. We aimed to confirm the existence of the portfolio effect (e.g. a decrease in duration allocated to individual cases as the global handoff progresses) in ICU's morning medical handoffs.

Two research assistants observed the morning handoffs in two ICUs (ICU-1, a 20-bed trauma and surgical ICU and ICU-2 a 10-bed medical and surgical ICU) within a university hospital, over a 6-month period. They were trained to measure the duration of each case (i.e., the handoff of a single patient). Patients' socio-demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records. The effect of the case position within the global handoff on its duration was determined using a linear regression after log transformation of duration. The case position was categorized as either before or after the median position (first and second halves). Covariates clinically associated with handoff duration were included in the model (age, sex, Charlson comorbidities index, SAPS II score, number of organ supports, center (ICU-1 or ICU-2) and reason for admission).

2485 individual cases nested in 169 morning handoffs and related to 494 patients' stays were observed. The mean (± SD) duration of the morning handoff was 60 minutes (± 12.5) in ICU-1 and 35.2 minutes (± 10.6) in ICU-2 with a mean number of cases presented of 18.9 (± 1.3) and 9.3 (± 1.0) respectively. The mean (± SD) duration of a case was 175 seconds (± 108). Trauma stays, patients severity and comorbidities, and the number of organ supports were associated with longer case handoffs. Asjusting for these covariates, cases in the second half were shorter compared to cases in the first half (RR 0.65, 95%CI (0.51 - 0.80)).

We confirmed the existence of a portfolio effect within ICU handoffs, emphasizing that interventions targeting handoffs' improvement should focus on the content and the setting. We suggest avoiding the presentation of a same patient systematically at the end of the round.

Poor-quality handoffs can lead to medical errors when transitioning patient care. Biased language within handoffs may contribute to errors and lead to disparities in health care delivery.

To compare clinical information recall accuracy and attitudes toward patients among trainees in paired cases of biased vs neutral language in simulated handoffs.

Surveys administered from April 29 to June 15 and from July 20 to October 10, 2023, included 3 simulated verbal handoffs, randomized between biased and neutral, and measured clinical information recall, attitudes toward patients, and key takeaways after each handoff. Participants included residents in internal medicine, pediatrics, and internal medicine-pediatrics and senior medical students at 2 academic medical centers in different geographic regions of the US. Data were analyzed from November 2023 to June 2024.

Each participant received 3 handoffs that were based on real handoffs about Black patients at 1 academic center. These handoffs were each randomized to either a biased or neutral version. Biased handoffs had 1 of 3 types of bias: stereotype, blame, or doubt. The order of handoff presentation was also randomized. Internal medicine and pediatrics residents received slightly different surveys, tailored for their specialty. Internal medicine-pediatrics residents received the pediatric survey. Medical students were randomly assigned the survey type.

Each handoff was followed by a clinical information recall question, an adapted version of the Provider Attitudes Toward Sickle Cell Patients Scale (PASS), and 3 free-response takeaways.

Of 748 trainees contacted, 169 participants (142 residents and 27 medical students) completed the survey (23% overall response rate), distributed across institutions, residency programs, and years of training (95 female [56%]; mean [SD] age, 28.6 [2.3] years). Participants who received handoffs with blame-based bias had less accurate information recall than those who received neutral handoffs (77% vs 93%; P = .005). Those who reported bias as a key takeaway of the handoff had lower clinical information recall accuracy than those who did not (85% vs 93%; P = .01). Participants had less positive attitudes toward patients per PASS scores after receiving biased compared with neutral handoffs (mean scores, 22.9 [3.3] vs 25.2 [2.7]; P < .001). More positive attitudes toward patients were associated with higher clinical information recall accuracy (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22).

In this survey study of residents and medical students, biased handoffs impeded accurate transfer of key clinical information and decreased empathy, potentially endangering patients and worsening health disparities. Handoff standardization is critical to addressing racial bias and improving patient safety.

Use of secure messaging for clinician-to-clinician communication has increased exponentially over the past decade, but its association with clinician work is poorly understood.

To investigate the association between secure messaging use and wrong-patient ordering errors.

This cohort study included inpatient attending physicians, trainee physicians, and advanced practice practitioners (APPs) from 14 academic and community hospitals. Secure messaging volume was assessed over a 3-month period (February 1 to April 30, 2023).

Secure messaging volume per clinician-day, measured as the count of secure messages sent and received by a clinician on a given clinician-day.

Retract-and-reorder events were used to identify wrong-patient ordering errors, and the presence of any retract-and-reorder event on a clinician-day was the primary outcome. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine the association between secure messaging volume and wrong-patient ordering errors after adjusting for clinician age, sex, patient load, order volume, and clinical service.

A total of 3239 clinicians (median [IQR] age, 37 [32-46] years; 1791 female [55.3%]; 1680 attending physicians [51.2%], 560 trainee physicians [17.3%], and 999 APPs [30.8%]) with 75 546 clinician-days were included. Median secure messaging volume was 16 (IQR, 0-61) messages per day. Retract-and-reorder events were identified on 295 clinician-days (0.4%). Clinicians with secure messaging volume at the 75th percentile had a 10% higher odds of wrong-patient ordering errors compared with those at the 25th percentile (odds ratio [OR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20). After stratifying by clinician role, the association between secure messaging and wrong-patient ordering errors was observed only for attending physicians (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.42) and APPs (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.40).

In this cohort study of inpatient clinicians, higher daily secure messaging was associated with increased odds of wrong-patient ordering errors. Although messaging may increase cognitive load and risk for wrong-patient ordering errors, these results do not provide conclusive evidence regarding the direct impact of secure messaging on errors, as increased messaging may also reflect greater care coordination, increased patient complexity, or communication of the presence of a wrong-patient ordering error.

An emergency medicine (EM) handoff note generated by a large language model (LLM) has the potential to reduce physician documentation burden without compromising the safety of EM-to-inpatient (IP) handoffs.

To develop LLM-generated EM-to-IP handoff notes and evaluate their accuracy and safety compared with physician-written notes.

This cohort study used EM patient medical records with acute hospital admissions that occurred in 2023 at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center. A customized clinical LLM pipeline was trained, tested, and evaluated to generate templated EM-to-IP handoff notes. Using both conventional automated methods (ie, recall-oriented understudy for gisting evaluation [ROUGE], bidirectional encoder representations from transformers score [BERTScore], and source chunking approach for large-scale inconsistency evaluation [SCALE]) and a novel patient safety-focused framework, LLM-generated handoff notes vs physician-written notes were compared. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to March 2024.

LLM-generated EM handoff notes.

LLM-generated handoff notes were evaluated for (1) lexical similarity with respect to physician-written notes using ROUGE and BERTScore; (2) fidelity with respect to source notes using SCALE; and (3) readability, completeness, curation, correctness, usefulness, and implications for patient safety using a novel framework.

In this study of 1600 EM patient records (832 [52%] female and mean [SD] age of 59.9 [18.9] years), LLM-generated handoff notes, compared with physician-written ones, had higher ROUGE (0.322 vs 0.088), BERTScore (0.859 vs 0.796), and SCALE scores (0.691 vs 0.456), indicating the LLM-generated summaries exhibited greater similarity and more detail. As reviewed by 3 board-certified EM physicians, a subsample of 50 LLM-generated summaries had a mean (SD) usefulness score of 4.04 (0.86) out of 5 (compared with 4.36 [0.71] for physician-written) and mean (SD) patient safety scores of 4.06 (0.86) out of 5 (compared with 4.50 [0.56] for physician-written). None of the LLM-generated summaries were classified as a critical patient safety risk.

In this cohort study of 1600 EM patient medical records, LLM-generated EM-to-IP handoff notes were determined superior compared with physician-written summaries via conventional automated evaluation methods, but marginally inferior in usefulness and safety via a novel evaluation framework. This study suggests the importance of a physician-in-loop implementation design for this model and demonstrates an effective strategy to measure preimplementation patient safety of LLM models.

Perioperative handoffs are known to present unique challenges to safe and effective patient care. Numerous national accrediting bodies have called for standardized, structured handoff processes. Handoff mnemonics provide a memory aid and standardized structure, as well as promote a shared mental model. We set out to identify perioperative handoff intervention studies that included a handoff mnemonic; critically assess process and patient outcome improvements that support specific mnemonics; and propose future recommendations.

We conducted a systematic review of the English language perioperative handoff intervention literature designed to identify handoff mnemonic interventions. A comprehensive protocol was developed and registered (CRD42022363615). Searches were conducted using PubMed, Scopus, ERIC (EBSCO), Education Full Text (EBSCO), EMBASE (Elsevier), and Cochrane (January 1, 2010 to May 31, 2022). Pairs of trained reviewers were involved in all phases of the search and extraction process.

Thirty-seven articles with 23 unique mnemonics met the inclusion criteria. Most articles were published after 2015 (29/37; 78%). Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation (SBAR), and SBAR variants were used in over half of all studies (22/37; 59%), with 45% (10/22) reporting at least 1 statistically significant process improvement. Seventy percent of handoff mnemonics (26/37) were expanded into lists or checklists. Fifty-seven percent of studies (21/37) reported using an interdisciplinary/interprofessional team to develop the intervention. In 49% of all studies (18/37) at least 1 measurement tool was either previously published or the authors conducting some form of measurement tool validation. Forty-one percent of process measurement tools (11/27) had some form of validation. Although most studies used training/education as an implementation strategy (36/37; 97%), descriptions tended to be brief with few details and no study used interprofessional education. Twenty-seven percent of the identified studies (10/37) measured perception alone and 11% (4/37) measured patient outcomes.

While the evidence supporting one handoff mnemonic over others is weak, SBAR/SBAR variants have been studied more often in the perioperative environment demonstrating some process improvements. A key finding is that 70% of included studies converted their handoff mnemonic to a list or checklist. Finally, given the essential nature of effective handoffs to perioperative patient safety, it is crucial that handoff interventions are well developed, implemented, and evaluated. We propose 8 recommendations for future perioperative handoff mnemonic clinical interventions and research.

An effective patient handover is a core element of high-quality patient care. Communication during patient handover in the intensive care unit is particularly challenging due to the clinical complexity and rapid changes in patient trajectories, complex interdisciplinary and interprofessional interfaces, linguistic barriers, situational and structural disruptive factors, personnel stress factors as well as the communication and error culture of the teams. In addition to avoiding disruptive factors and creating optimal communication conditions and human resources, the use of standardized and structured handovers with the help of protocols and checklists, as recommended in the literature, plays a decisive role as part of a bundle of measures for effective and safe patient care.

Effective handoff between pediatric residents is crucial to ensure continuity of care and patient safety. Omissions in information and communication breakdowns can be associated with uncertainty in clinical decision-making and adverse patient events. In our role as chief residents, we were notified of an increase in patient safety alerts due to communication failures and gaps during handoff. We aimed to identify areas for improvement and implement strategies to improve competence in handoff among pediatric residents. We also explored pediatric residents' confidence levels regarding handoff procedures and the effectiveness of our interventions in the transfer of care.

Two chief residents conducted direct handoff observations of residents during the transfer of care of inpatients over six months. Residents were scored using a handoff checklist, and formative feedback was provided to each resident after the observation session. Deficits and barriers to properly executed handoff were noted and used to develop a series of handoff workshops. Pre- and post-workshop confidence in handoff skills was calculated from an average of each five-point Likert scale item (1=not at all confident, 5=very confident).

 Forty pediatric residents were assessed performing inpatient handoff. We observed 38 handoff sessions. All of these involved face-to-face interactions with verbal and written communication in the I-PASS (illness severity, patient summary, action list, situation awareness and contingency planning, and synthesis by the receiver) format, allowing the receiver of the information to clarify issues and ask questions. Protocol failures were identified in 50% of the handoffs observed. This included disruptions during handoff (5%), incorrect relay of patient information (26%), prioritizing sick patients (26%), omission of care tasks (10%), and provision of contingency planning (31%). Forty residents participated in the handoff workshops. Regarding confidence in handoff before and after the workshop, 67% of residents initially reported feeling "very confident" or "fairly confident" in their patient handoff skills. After the completion of the workshops, 98% of residents reported "fairly confident" or "very confident" in their ability to perform handoff. Pre- and post-workshop surveys demonstrated self-perceived increases in confidence (P<0.001). Following the completion of the workshops, we conducted observations and found that residents properly executed handoffs, and we received no further patient safety alerts regarding communication breakdowns.

 We identified several protocol failures in effective handoff among pediatric residents. Chief resident-led targeted workshops addressed these lapses, improved the effectiveness of patient handoffs, and reduced patient safety events related to breakdowns in communication. Our interventions increased confidence in handoff among pediatric residents, and these effects were sustained over time.

Intraoperative handoffs have been implicated as a contributing factor in many perioperative adverse events. Despite conflicting data around their impact on perioperative outcomes, they remain a vulnerable point in the perioperative system with significant attention focused on improving them. This study aimed to understand the processes in place surrounding the point of information transfer in intraoperative handoffs.

We used semistructured interviews with anesthesia clinicians to understand the processes and systems surrounding intraoperative handoffs. Interview data were coded deductively using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model as a framework, with subthemes developed inductively.

Clinicians do a significant amount of work before and after the point of information transfer to ensure a smooth handoff and safe patient care. Despite not having standardization of handoffs, most clinicians have a typical handoff organization and largely agree on content that should be included. However, there is variability based on clinician and patient characteristics, including clinician discipline and patient acuity. These handoffs are additionally impacted by the overall culture in the operating room, including the teamwork and hierarchies present among the surgical and anesthesia teams. Finally, the broader operating room logistics, including scheduling practices for surgical cases and anesthesia teams, impact the quality of intraoperative handoffs and the ability of clinicians to prepare for these handoffs.

Handoffs involve processes beyond the point of information transfer and are embedded in the systems and culture of the operating rooms. These considerations are important when seeking to improve the quality of intraoperative handoffs.

Starting the first job as a young physician is a demanding challenge. Certain skills are important to master this transformation that go beyond the theoretical knowledge and practical skills taught in medical school. Competencies such as communication, leadership and career management skills are important to develop as a young physician but are usually not sufficiently taught in medical school in a structured and comprehensive way.

We performed an online survey among final year medical students regarding how they perceive their current competency level in communication, leadership and career management skills. We also assessed how they rate the importance to acquire these competencies and the current emphasis during their medical school education regarding these topics.

Of 450 final year medical students 80 took part in the voluntary survey and 75 complete datasets were returned (16.7%). The majority of respondents rated different communication skills, leadership skills and career management skills as important or very important for their later clinical work. However, most students felt to be poorly or very poorly prepared by the current medical school curriculum, especially for certain leadership and career management skills. Overall, 90.7% of participants expressed interest in an additional educational course that covers subjects of communication, leadership and career management skills during the later stage of medical school, preferably as a hybrid in-person session that also offers synchronous online participation.

The results of the survey express the need to address communication, leadership and career management skills in the medical curriculum to be better prepare students for the demands of residency and their further course as physicians. An educational format during the final year of medical school may be suitable to address mentioned topics in the framework of clinical practical exposure.

Examine family safety-reporting after implementing a parent-nurse-physician-leader coproduced, health literacy-informed, family safety-reporting intervention for hospitalized families of children with medical complexity.

We implemented an English and Spanish mobile family-safety-reporting tool, staff and family education, and process for sharing comments with unit leaders on a dedicated inpatient complex care service at a pediatric hospital. Families shared safety concerns via predischarge surveys (baseline and intervention) and mobile tool (intervention). Three physicians with patient safety expertise classified events. We compared safety-reporting baseline (via survey) versus intervention (via survey and/or mobile tool) with generalized estimating equations and sub-analyzed data by COVID-19-era and educational attainment. We also compared mobile tool-detected event rates with hospital voluntary incident reporting.

232 baseline and 208 intervention parents participated (78.2% consented); 29.5% of baseline families versus 38.2% of intervention families reported safety concerns (P = .09). Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of families reporting safety concerns intervention versus baseline was 1.6 (1.0-2.6) overall, 2.6 (1.3-5.4) for those with < college education, and 3.1 (1.3-7.3) in the COVID-19-era subgroup. Safety concerns reported via mobile tool (34.6% of enrolled parents) included 42 medical errors, 43 nonsafety-related quality issues, 11 hazards, and 4 other. 15% of mobile tool concerns were also detected with voluntary incident reporting.

Family safety-reporting was unchanged overall after implementing a mobile reporting tool, though reporting increased among families with lower educational attainment and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The tool identified many events not otherwise captured by staff-only voluntary incident reporting. Hospitals should proactively engage families in reporting to improve safety, quality, and equity.

The complexity of pediatric patients' outpatient medication regimens is increasing, and risk for medication errors is compounded in a busy emergency department (ED). As ED length of stay (LOS) increases, timely and accurate administration of essential outpatient medications has become increasingly challenging. Our objective was to increase the frequency of ordering of essential outpatient medications for patients with ED LOS >4 hours from 56% to 80% by June 2023.

We conducted a quality improvement (QI) initiative in a pediatric ED with ∼60 000 annual visits comprising a total of 91 000 annual medication orders. We defined essential outpatient medications as antiepileptic drugs, cardiovascular medications, and immunosuppressants. Our QI interventions included a combination of electronic health record interventions, a triage notification system to identify patients with essential outpatient medications, and widespread educational interventions including trainee orientation and individualized nursing education. The primary outcome measure was percentage of essential outpatient medications ordered among patients with an ED LOS >4 hours, with a secondary measure of outpatient medication safety events.

Baseline monthly ordering rate of selected medications for patients with an ED LOS >4 hours was 54%, with an increase to 66% over the study period. Refining our population yielded a rate of 81%. Outpatient medication safety events remained unchanged, with an average of 952 ED encounters between events.

A multidisciplinary QI initiative led to increased essential outpatient medication ordering for patients in a pediatric ED with no change in safety events.

Infants admitted to NICUs in children's hospitals represent a different population than those in a traditional birth hospital. The patients in a children's hospital NICU often have the most complex neonatal diagnoses and are cared for by various subspecialists. The Children's Hospitals Neonatal Consortium is a collaborative of more than 40 NICUs that collect data and perform quality improvement (QI) work across the United States and Canada. The collaborative's database provides an opportunity to benchmark clinical outcomes for this specialized population and to support the QI efforts. In this review, we summarize the success of individual collaborative QI projects focused on improving the care of the neonate in the perioperative period related to clinical team handoffs, postoperative hypothermia prevention, and improvement of postoperative pain management. The collaborative's experience can serve as a model for other national collaboratives seeking to support QI efforts.

High-quality health information handovers are critical to optimal patient care and trainee education. The purposes of this study were to assess the feasibility of implementing an emergency general surgery (EGS) morning handover and to explore its impact upon markers of clinical care.

This prospective feasibility study was conducted at a single academic tertiary-care medical center following implementation of a novel EGS morning handover process. We assessed organizational perspective through a two-part anonymous survey delivered to the EGS service staff (n = 29) and collected feasibility metrics daily at the morning handover meetings. Exploratory clinical metrics of quality improvement were compared between parallel 5-month periods preimplementation and postimplementation of the handover. Data were compared by descriptive statistics.

One hundred and seventeen patients from March 1, 2022, to July 31, 2022, and 185 patients from March 1, 2023, to July 31, 2023, were identified prehandover and posthandover implementation, respectively, with an increase in time to operating room posting by 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-2.14) and no statistically significant change in length of stay. The average duration of the formalized EGS morning handover was 14 min (95% CI: 12:18-15:42) having an average of 12 questions asked (95% CI: 9.98-14.02) and an average attendance of 70% from essential personnel. Eighty-four percent of postimplementation survey responses indicated positive regard toward the new EGS handover.

The implementation of an EGS morning handover is feasible, necessitating further studies to define the impact of the EGS morning handover upon clinical outcomes.

Miscommunications account for up to 80% of preventable medical errors. Mnemonics like I-PASS (Illness severity, Patient summary, Actions list, Situation awareness, Synthesis) have demonstrated a positive impact on reducing error rates. Currently, physicians at our hospital do not follow a specific structure during hand-offs. We aimed to compare current hand-offs without prior training to a gold standard and the I-PASS tool in terms of content and sequence.

This study is a secondary analysis of data collected during a simulation study of a Friday evening hand-off to the night resident at University Hospitals of Geneva. Thirty physicians received a hand-off of four patients and managed two other patients through nursing pages at the start of the night shift, generating six sign-outs each, totaling 177 sign-outs. A focus group of three senior doctors defined the gold standard (GS) by consensus on the essential content of each sign-out. The analysis focused on the rates of relevance (ratio of information considered relevant by the GS) and completeness (proportion of transmitted elements out of all expected elements of the GS), and the distribution and sequence of the first four I-PASS categories.

Relevance and completeness rates were 37.2% ± 0.07 and 51.9% ± 0.1, respectively, with no significant difference between residents and supervisors. There was a positive correlation between total hand-off time and relevance (residents: R2 = 0.62; supervisors: R2 = 0.67) and completeness (residents: R2 = 0.32; supervisors: R2 = 0.56). The distribution of I-PASS categories was highly skewed in both the GS (I = 2%, P = 72%, A = 17%, S = 9%) and participants (I = 6%, P = 73%, A = 14%, S = 7%), with significant differences in categories A (p = 0.046) and I (p ≤ 0.001). Sequences of I-PASS categories generally followed a P-A-S-I pattern. The first S category was frequently absent, and only one participant began by announcing the case severity as suggested by I-PASS.

We identified gaps between current medical sign-outs in our institution's general internal medicine division and the I-PASS structure. We recommend implementing the I-PASS mnemonic, emphasizing the "I" category at the start and the "S" category to anticipate and prevent complications. Future studies should assess the impact of this recommendation, adapt the mnemonic elements to the context, and introduce specific hand-off training for senior medical students.

Handoffs involve the transfer of patient information and responsibility for care between health care professionals. The purpose of the current scoping review was (1) to describe handoff studies with education as part of the intervention and (2) to explore the role of handoff educational interventions in sustaining handoff improvements. This scoping review utilized previously published systematic reviews and a structured, systematic search of 5 databases (January 2006-June 2020). Articles were identified, and data were extracted by pairs of trained, independent reviewers. The search identified 74 relevant articles, most published after 2015 (70%) and conducted in the United States (76%). Almost all of the studies (99%) utilized instruction, 66% utilized skills practice, 89% utilized a memory aid, and 43% utilized reinforcement. However, few studies reported using education theory or followed accepted tenets of curriculum development. There has been a substantial increase over time in reporting actual handoff behavior change (17%-68%) and a smaller but important increase in reporting patient outcomes (11%-18%). Thirty-five percent of studies (26/74) had follow-up for 6 months or more. Twelve studies met the criteria for sustained change, which were follow-up for 6 months or more and achieving statistically significant improvements in either handoff skills/processes or patient outcomes at the conclusion of the study. All 12 studies with sustained change used multi-modal educational interventions, and reinforcement was more likely to be used in these studies than all others (75%, 9/12) versus (37%, 23/62), P = 0.015. Future handoff intervention efforts that include education should use education theory to guide development and include needs assessment and goals and measurable objectives. Educational interventions should be multi-modal and include reinforcement. Future research studies should measure actual handoff behavior change (skills/process) and patient outcomes, include follow-up for more than 6 months, and use education reporting guidelines.

Data on inpatient safety are documented by hospital staff through incident reporting (IR) systems. Safety observations from families or patients are rarely captured. The Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS) study created a mobile health tool for pediatric patients and their families to anonymously report safety observations in real time during hospitalization. The study objectives were to describe these observations and identify domains salient to safety.

In this observational study, we analyzed pediatric patient safety reports from June 2017 to April 2018. Participants were: English-speaking family members and hospitalized patients ≥13 years old. The analysis had two stages: (1) assessment of whether narratives met established safety event criteria and whether there were companion IRs; (2) thematic analysis to identify domains.

Of 248 enrolled participants, 58 submitted 120 narrative reports. Of the narratives, 68 (57%) met safety event criteria, while only 1 (0.8%) corresponded to a staff-reported IR. Twenty-five percent of narratives shared positive feedback about patient safety efforts; 75% shared constructive feedback. We identified domains particularly salient to safety: (1) patients and families as safety actors; (2) emotional safety; (3) system-centered care; and (4) shared safety domains, including medication, communication, and environment of care. Some domains capture data that is otherwise difficult to obtain (#1-3), while others fit within standard healthcare safety domains (#4).

Patients and families observe and report salient safety events that can fill gaps in IR data. Healthcare leaders should consider incorporating patient and family observations-collected with an option for anonymity and eliciting both positive and constructive comments.

Communication failures are among the most common causes of harmful medical errors. At one Comprehensive Cancer Center, patient handoffs varied among services. The authors describe the implementation and results of an organization-wide project to improve handoffs and implement an evidence-based handoff tool across all inpatient services.

The research team created a task force composed of members from 22 hospital services-advanced practice providers (APPs), trainees, some faculty members, electronic health record (EHR) staff, education and training specialists, and nocturnal providers. Over two years, the task force expanded to include consulting services and Anesthesiology. Factors contributing to ineffective handoffs were identified and organized into categories. The EHR I-PASS tool was used to standardize handoff documentation. Training was provided to staff on its use, and compliance was monitored using a customized dashboard. I-PASS champions in each service were responsible for the rollout of I-PASS in their respective services. The data were reported quarterly to the Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) governing committee. Provider handoff perception was assessed through the biennial Institution-wide safety culture survey.

All fellows, residents, APPs, and physician assistants were trained in the use of I-PASS, either online or in person. Adherence to the I-PASS written tool improved from 41.6% in 2019 to 70.5% in 2022 (p < 0.05), with improvements seen in most services. The frequency of updating I-PASS elements and the action list in the handoff tool also increased over time. The handoff favorability score on the safety culture survey improved from 38% in 2018 to 59% in 2022.

The implementation approach developed by the Provider Handoff Task Force led to increased use of the I-PASS EHR tool and improved safety culture survey handoff favorability.

Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandate training in handoff delivery for students and residents. Communication errors, including errors during handoffs of patient care, account for over 2/3 of sentinel events. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of peer-assisted learning (PAL) in handoff education within a longitudinal framework.

This study involved the analysis of fourth-year medical students (n = 67) enrolled in a transition to residency program designed to reinforce skills essential for success in internal medicine residencies. We modified the I-PASS handoff rubric for a single-encounter evaluation. Before attending the transitions of care workshop, students submitted one written handoff report. During high-fidelity simulation sessions, peers evaluated the written document as well as verbal handoffs, while faculty evaluated a recorded verbal version. The primary outcome measured was improvement in handoff quality and accuracy over time and secondary outcomes compared peer- and self-evaluations to faculty assessments.

Overall, students demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in handoff quality and accuracy across all scoring criteria after completing the peer evaluation process. Peer evaluations did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in scores for quality or accuracy questions as compared to faculty.

Peer evaluators effectively assessed handoff reports using the modified I-PASS checklist yielding outcomes similar to faculty while providing feedback. These findings provide exciting evidence that should prompt training programs to consider incorporating standardized peer review into handoff education for medical students and, potentially, residents. The detailed evaluation of individual handoff events fosters feedback skills essential for ongoing professional growth and clinical excellence.

Artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is the ability of a computer to perform tasks typically associated with clinical care (e.g. medical decision-making and documentation). AI will soon be integrated into an increasing number of healthcare applications, including elements of emergency department (ED) care. Here, we describe the basics of AI, various categories of its functions (including machine learning and natural language processing) and review emerging and potential future use-cases for emergency care. For example, AI-assisted symptom checkers could help direct patients to the appropriate setting, models could assist in assigning triage levels, and ambient AI systems could document clinical encounters. AI could also help provide focused summaries of charts, summarize encounters for hand-offs, and create discharge instructions with an appropriate language and reading level. Additional use cases include medical decision making for decision rules, real-time models that predict clinical deterioration or sepsis, and efficient extraction of unstructured data for coding, billing, research, and quality initiatives. We discuss the potential transformative benefits of AI, as well as the concerns regarding its use (e.g. privacy, data accuracy, and the potential for changing the doctor-patient relationship).

Physician communication failures during transfers of patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the general ward are common and can lead to adverse events. Efforts to improve written handoffs during these transfers are increasingly prominent, but no instruments have been developed to assess the quality of physician ICU-ward transfer notes.

To collect validity evidence for the modified nine-item Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (mPDQI-9) for assessing ICU-ward transfer note usefulness across several hospitals.

Twenty-four physician raters independently used the mPDQI-9 to grade 12 notes collected from three academic hospitals. A priori, we excluded the "up-to-date" and "accurate" domains, because these could not be assessed without giving the rater access to the complete patient chart. Assessments therefore used the domains "thorough," "useful," "organized," "comprehensible," "succinct," "synthesized," and "consistent." Raters scored each domain on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (high). The total mPDQI-9 was the sum of these domain scores. The primary outcome was the raters' perceived clinical utility of the notes, and the primary measures of interest were criterion validity (Spearman's ρ) and interrater reliability (intraclass correlation [ICC]).

Mean mPDQI-9 scores by note ranged from 19 (SD = 5.5) to 30 (SD = 4.2). Mean note ratings did not systematically differ by rater expertise (for interaction, P = 0.15). The proportion of raters perceiving each note as independently sufficient for patient care (the primary outcome) ranged from 33% to 100% across the set of notes. We found a moderately positive correlation between mPDQI-9 ratings and raters' overall assessments of each note's clinical utility (ρ = 0.48, P < 0.001). Interrater reliability was strong; the overall ICC was 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-0.85), and ICCs were similar among reviewer groups. Finally, Cronbach's α was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.89), indicating good internal consistency.

We report moderate validity evidence for the mPDQI-9 to assess the usefulness of ICU-ward transfer notes written by internal medicine residents.

Communication errors during transfer of care from one clinician to another are a major cause of medical errors. In 2006, The Joint Commission made handoff communications a national patient safety goal. In 2014, the Association of American Medical Colleges included giving and receiving a report to transfer a patient's care as one of the 13 core entrustable professional activities required for entry into residency programs. Communication is the key to successful transfer of patient care from one clinician to another during shift change. A structured method of communication used by all clinicians in high-stakes healthcare settings can ensure all vital information about a patient is given to the receiving clinician.

Effective handoffs in the intensive care unit (ICU) are key to patient safety.

This article aims to raise awareness of the significance of structured and thorough handoffs and highlights possible challenges as well as means for improvement.

Based on the available literature, the evidence regarding handoffs in ICUs is summarized and suggestions for practical implementation are derived.

The quality of handoffs has an impact on patient safety. At the same time, communication in the intensive care setting is particularly challenging due to the complexity of cases, a disruptive work environment, and a multitude of inter- and intraprofessional interactions. Hierarchical team structures, deficiencies in feedback and error-management culture, (technical) language barriers in communication, as well as substantial physical and psychological stress may negatively influence the effectiveness of handoffs. Sets of interventions such as the implementation of checklists, mnemonics, and communication workshops contribute to a more structured and thorough handoff process and have the potential to significantly improve patient safety.

Effective handoffs are the cornerstone of high-quality and safe patient care but face particular challenges in ICUs. Interventional measures such as structuring handoff concepts and periodic communication trainings can help to improve handoffs and thus increase patient safety.

Effective patient handoffs are vital in pediatric populations. This study aimed to develop and identify the impact of a metaverse-based handoff program using ZEPETO on nursing students' handoff competence, handoff self-efficacy, learning realism, and satisfaction.

This study used a non-randomized, pre-post nonequivalent group design to develop, implement, and verify a metaverse-based handoff simulation program in a nursing school in South Korea. We assigned 69 senior nursing students from a university to an experimental group or a control group. We developed a metaverse-based, handoff simulation program of family-centered care by building a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) using ZEPETO. The program included an online lecture, a metaverse rounding discussion, and a metaverse-based handoff simulation of postoperative care for infants with congenital heart disease. We measured handoff competence, handoff self-efficacy, learning realism, and learning satisfaction pre- and post-program.

The experimental group showed significantly higher handoff self-efficacy than the control group (t = 3.17, p = 0.002). No significant differences were found in handoff competency, learning realism, or learning satisfaction between the groups.

This study confirmed that a family-centered care-based handoff metaverse simulation program based on the experiential learning theory enhanced nursing students' handoff self-efficacy. The program equipped students to conduct safe and effective handoffs in real-world clinical settings by providing an immersive learning experience and emphasizing patient-centered communication.

Based on these results, family-centered, handoff education programs are recommended to be developed that focus on learning realism and learning satisfaction to enhance nursing students' handoff competence.

Outpatient providers refer to emergency departments (EDs) due to findings requiring assessment beyond existing capabilities. However, poor communication surrounding these transitions may hinder safety and timeliness of emergency care. Receiver-driven handoff (RDH) is a process that helps ensure that all pertinent information is shared. This quality improvement project aimed to (1) improve knowledge of RDH, (2) increase satisfaction and perceptions surrounding RDH, (3) modify behaviors in relation to RDH, and (4) decrease referred patients leaving without being seen (LWBS).

The Iowa Model and Implementation Framework guided this evidence-based quality improvement project. A multidisciplinary team developed and implemented a standardized RDH process consisting of screening to determine whether a patient was referred to the ED, review of electronic health record (EHR), and use of EHR documentation. Process measures were collected via questionnaire pre- and postimplementation and were analyzed quantitatively. Outcome measures were trended by a statistical process control p-chart, which was developed to demonstrate changes in the percentage of patients who were referred to the ED from the outpatient setting and LWBS.

The average response for the question "How satisfied are you with the handoff of patient information from referring clinic providers to the ED?" increased from 1.51 preintervention to 2.04 postintervention (p = 0.005). Respondents rated the information received during handoff higher postintervention (2.12 vs. 2.52, p = 0.04). Compliance with screening for referral to the ED was 84.0%. The proportion of patients LWBS after referral decreased by 6.2 percentage points (p < 0.001).

Using RDH in conjunction with a standardized triage screening may improve quality of information shared during this vulnerable transition and may assist in reduction of referred patients LWBS. The RDH process should be adapted into everyday workflow to ensure sustainability and effectiveness.

To characterize the phases of a new admission interaction between collaborating pediatric residents and fellows; to explore trainee perspectives on motivating and demotivating qualities of that interaction; and to identify behaviors that lead to an optimal new admission interaction.

The authors used modified grounded theory with experiential learning theory and self-determination theory as sensitizing concepts to conduct 6 focus groups and journey mapping at Stanford Children's Health from January to March 2021. The sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Two authors independently coded the transcripts and developed categories and themes using constant comparison, while a third author reviewed these findings. The qualitative data were triangulated with surveys and journey mapping data and conceptualized into a model of trainee motivation during the new admission interaction. They outlined an optimal new admission interaction using behaviors consistently described by participants as motivating.

Developing inter-trainee trust and educational buy-in is essential for both residents and fellows to feel intrinsically motivated and engaged during a new admission. Residents need to feel autonomous, competent, and related to the team in order to develop trust and buy-in. Fellows require assurance of patient safety to develop trust and a sense of self-efficacy in fostering resident growth to develop buy-in. Lack of trust or buy-in from either party leads to a cycle of trainee disengagement.

Trainee motivation and engagement with patient care can be impacted by discreet, modifiable behavior by their fellow or resident counterpart, which may help improve the quality of care delivered.

Direct admission (DA) to the hospital has the potential to improve family satisfaction and timeliness of care by bypassing the emergency department. Using the RE-AIM implementation framework, we sought to characterize variation across health systems in the reach, effectiveness, adoption, and implementation of a DA program from the perspectives of parents and multidisciplinary clinicians.

As part of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of DA to admission through the emergency department, we evaluated DA rates across 69 clinics and 3 health systems and conducted semi-structured interviews with parents and clinicians. We used thematic analysis to identify themes related to the reach, effectiveness, adoption, and implementation of the DA program and applied axial coding to characterize thematic differences across sites.

Of 2599 hospitalizations, 171 (6.6%) occurred via DA, with DA rates varying 10-fold across health systems from 0.9% to 9.3%. Through the analysis of 137 interviews, including 84 with clinicians and 53 with parents, we identified similarities across health systems in themes related to perceived program effectiveness and patient and family engagement. Thematic differences across sites in the domains of program implementation and clinician adoption included variation in transfer center efficiency, trust between referring and accepting clinicians, and the culture of change within the health system.

The DA program was adopted variably, highlighting unique challenges and opportunities for implementation in different hospital systems. These findings can inform future quality improvement efforts to improve transitions to the hospital.

The diagnostic process is a dynamic, team-based activity that is an important aspect of ward rounds in teaching hospitals. However, few studies have examined how academic ward teams operate in areas such as diagnosis in the handoff of overnight admissions during ward rounds. This study draws key lessons from team interactions in the handoff process during ward rounds.

To describe how ward teams operate in the handoff of patients admitted overnight during ward rounds, and to characterize the role of the bedside patient evaluation in this context.

A qualitative ethnographic approach using field observations and documentary analysis.

Attending physicians, medical residents, and medical students on general medicine services in a single teaching hospital.

Thirty-five hours of observations were undertaken over a 4-month period. We purposively approached a diverse group of attendings who cover a range of clinical teaching experience, and obtained informed consent from all ward team members and observed patients. Thirty patient handoffs were observed across 5 ward teams with 45 team members. We conducted thematic analysis of researcher field notes and electronic health record documents using social cognitive theories to characterize the dynamic interactions occurring in the real clinical environment.

Teams spent less time during ward rounds on verifying history and physical examination findings, performing bedside evaluations, and discussing differential diagnoses than other aspects (e.g., reviewing patient data in conference rooms) in the team handoff process of overnight admissions. Several team-based approaches to diagnosis and bedside patient evaluations were observed, including debriefing for learning and decision-making.

This study highlights potential strengths and missed opportunities for teaching, learning, and engaging directly with patients in the ward team handoff of patients admitted overnight. These findings may inform curriculum development, faculty training, and patient safety research.