Examining the impact of validated handover protocols on treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients: a systematic review.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1007/s00068-025-02776-z
Eva Steinfeld, Karolina Dahms, Julia Dormann, Kelly Ansems, Heidrun Janka, Maria Inti-Metzendorf, Gernot Marx, Carina Benstoem, Thomas Breuer
{"title":"Examining the impact of validated handover protocols on treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients: a systematic review.","authors":"Eva Steinfeld, Karolina Dahms, Julia Dormann, Kelly Ansems, Heidrun Janka, Maria Inti-Metzendorf, Gernot Marx, Carina Benstoem, Thomas Breuer","doi":"10.1007/s00068-025-02776-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Effective patient handovers in healthcare settings are critical for ensuring patient safety and care quality. Handover tools have gained prominence as potential aids in improving these transitions. This systematic review seeks to answer the question if the use of validated handover protocols leads to better treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients compared to no use of validated handover protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science to identify relevant studies from inception of each database to June 15, 2022. We intended to include systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials comparing the use of validated handover tools to no use of such tools in adult polytrauma patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Despite the absence of systematic reviews and RCTs meeting our criteria, we included 26 initially excluded studies to glean insights into handover tool usage. This broader inclusion facilitated the identification of two categories of tools: standardized tools and customized tools. Among studies employing customized tools, positive outcomes were reported in various aspects, including enhanced information quality, improved staff communication, and reduced risks and treatment errors. In contrast, studies utilizing well-established standardized tools documented improvements in communication, documentation, and overall satisfaction among medical professionals, signaling a reduction in communication errors and lost information.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Heterogeneity of the studies and no trials meeting our eligibility criteria present challenges for conducting a traditional systematic review. In the lack of evidence from RCTs and systematic reviews, our analysis of the available studies sheds light on the complexities of assessing handover tools' utility, especially in diverse clinical settings. It highlights the need for more standardized methodologies and further investigation into the effectiveness of custom-designed tools. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the role of handover tools in healthcare. While some studies suggest positive outcomes, further research is necessary to elucidate the design and implementation of these tools to enhance care and support healthcare professionals in their roles.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":"51 1","pages":"109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02776-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Effective patient handovers in healthcare settings are critical for ensuring patient safety and care quality. Handover tools have gained prominence as potential aids in improving these transitions. This systematic review seeks to answer the question if the use of validated handover protocols leads to better treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients compared to no use of validated handover protocols.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science to identify relevant studies from inception of each database to June 15, 2022. We intended to include systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials comparing the use of validated handover tools to no use of such tools in adult polytrauma patients.

Results: Despite the absence of systematic reviews and RCTs meeting our criteria, we included 26 initially excluded studies to glean insights into handover tool usage. This broader inclusion facilitated the identification of two categories of tools: standardized tools and customized tools. Among studies employing customized tools, positive outcomes were reported in various aspects, including enhanced information quality, improved staff communication, and reduced risks and treatment errors. In contrast, studies utilizing well-established standardized tools documented improvements in communication, documentation, and overall satisfaction among medical professionals, signaling a reduction in communication errors and lost information.

Conclusion: Heterogeneity of the studies and no trials meeting our eligibility criteria present challenges for conducting a traditional systematic review. In the lack of evidence from RCTs and systematic reviews, our analysis of the available studies sheds light on the complexities of assessing handover tools' utility, especially in diverse clinical settings. It highlights the need for more standardized methodologies and further investigation into the effectiveness of custom-designed tools. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the role of handover tools in healthcare. While some studies suggest positive outcomes, further research is necessary to elucidate the design and implementation of these tools to enhance care and support healthcare professionals in their roles.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
期刊最新文献
Impact of education in patients undergoing physiotherapy for lower back pain: a level I systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgical rib fixation in patients with cardiopulmonary disease improves outcomes. The role of serum vaspin level in the early diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia induced in experimental animal model. Examining the impact of validated handover protocols on treatment outcomes in polytrauma patients: a systematic review. Correction: Preoperative cardiology consultations for geriatric patients with hip fractures rarely provide additional recommendations and are associated with prolonged hospital stays and delayed surgery: a retrospective case control study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1