Implementing situation-background-assessment-recommendation in an anaesthetic clinic and subsequent information retention among receivers: A prospective interventional study of postoperative handovers
2016 (English)In: European Journal of Anaesthesiology, ISSN 0265-0215, E-ISSN 1365-2346, Vol. 33, no 3, 172-178 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
BACKGROUND Communication errors cause clinical inci-dents and adverse events in relation to surgery. To ensureproper postoperative patient care, it is essential that person-nel remember and recall information given during the hand-over from the operating theatre to the postanaesthesia careunit. Formalizing the handover may improve communicationand aid memory, but research in this area is lacking.OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluatewhether implementing the communication tool Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) affectsreceivers’ information retention after postoperative handover.DESIGN A prospective intervention study with an interven-tion group and comparison nonintervention group, withassessments before and after the intervention.SETTING The postanaesthesia care units of two hospitals inSweden during 2011 and 2012.PARTICIPANTS Staff involved in the handover between theoperating theatre and the postanaesthesia care units withineach hospital.INTERVENTION Implementation of the communication toolSBAR in one hospital.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The main outcome was thepercentage of recalled information sequences among recei-vers after the handover. Data were collected using both audio-recordings and observations recorded on a study-specificprotocol form.RESULTS Preintervention, 73 handovers were observed(intervention group, n 1⁄4 40; comparison group, n 1⁄4 33)involving 72 personnel (intervention group, n 1⁄4 40; com-parison group, n 1⁄4 32). Postintervention, 91 handoverswere observed (intervention group, n 1⁄4 44; comparisongroup, n 1⁄4 47) involving 57 personnel (intervention group,n 1⁄4 31; comparison group, n 1⁄4 26). In the interventiongroup, the percentage of recalled information sequencesby the receivers increased from 43.4% preintervention to52.6% postintervention (P 1⁄4 0.004) and the SBAR struc-ture improved significantly (P 1⁄4 0.028). In the comparisongroup, the corresponding figures were 51.3 and 52.6%(P 1⁄4 0.725) with no difference in SBAR structure. When alinear regression generalised estimating equation modelwas used to account for confounding influences, we wereunable to show a significant difference in the informationrecalled between the intervention group and the noninter-vention group over time.CONCLUSION Compared with the comparison group withno intervention, when SBAR was implemented in an anaes-thetic clinic, we were unable to show any improvement in recalled information among receivers following postoperative handover.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 33, no 3, 172-178 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-273677DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000335ISI: 000369548100003PubMedID: 26760400OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-273677DiVA: diva2:894906