评估当前外科手术中的交接班做法:对爱尔兰医院非顾问医生的调查。

Jessica M. Ryan , Anastasija Simiceva , Conor Toale , Walter Eppich , Dara O. Kavanagh , Deborah A. McNamara
{"title":"评估当前外科手术中的交接班做法:对爱尔兰医院非顾问医生的调查。","authors":"Jessica M. Ryan ,&nbsp;Anastasija Simiceva ,&nbsp;Conor Toale ,&nbsp;Walter Eppich ,&nbsp;Dara O. Kavanagh ,&nbsp;Deborah A. McNamara","doi":"10.1016/j.surge.2024.04.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Handovers of care are potentially hazardous moments in the patient journey and can lead to harm if conducted poorly. Through a national survey of surgical doctors in Ireland, this paper assesses contemporary surgical handover practices and evaluates barriers and facilitators of effective handover.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>After ethical approval and pre-testing with a representative sample, a cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs) working in the Republic of Ireland. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining data using triangulation design.</div></div><div><h3>Main findings</h3><div>A total of 201 responses were received (18.5%). Most participants were senior house officers or senior registrars (49.7% and 37.3%). Most people (85.1%) reported that information received during handover was missing or incorrect at least some of the time. One-third of respondents reported that a near-miss had occurred as a result of handover within the past three months, and handover-related errors resulted in minor (16.9%), moderate (4.9%), or major (1.5%) harm. Only 11.4% had received any formal training. Reported barriers to handover included negative attitudes, a lack of institutional support, and competing clinical activities. Facilitators included process standardisation, improved access to resources, and staff engagement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Surgical NCHDs working in Irish hospitals reported poor compliance with international best practice for handover and identified potential harms. Process standardisation, appropriate staff training, and the provision of necessary handover-related resources is required at a national level to address this significant patient safety concern.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49463,"journal":{"name":"Surgeon-Journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland","volume":"22 6","pages":"Pages 338-343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing current handover practices in surgery: A survey of non-consultant hospital doctors in Ireland\",\"authors\":\"Jessica M. Ryan ,&nbsp;Anastasija Simiceva ,&nbsp;Conor Toale ,&nbsp;Walter Eppich ,&nbsp;Dara O. Kavanagh ,&nbsp;Deborah A. McNamara\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.surge.2024.04.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Handovers of care are potentially hazardous moments in the patient journey and can lead to harm if conducted poorly. Through a national survey of surgical doctors in Ireland, this paper assesses contemporary surgical handover practices and evaluates barriers and facilitators of effective handover.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>After ethical approval and pre-testing with a representative sample, a cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs) working in the Republic of Ireland. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining data using triangulation design.</div></div><div><h3>Main findings</h3><div>A total of 201 responses were received (18.5%). Most participants were senior house officers or senior registrars (49.7% and 37.3%). Most people (85.1%) reported that information received during handover was missing or incorrect at least some of the time. One-third of respondents reported that a near-miss had occurred as a result of handover within the past three months, and handover-related errors resulted in minor (16.9%), moderate (4.9%), or major (1.5%) harm. Only 11.4% had received any formal training. Reported barriers to handover included negative attitudes, a lack of institutional support, and competing clinical activities. Facilitators included process standardisation, improved access to resources, and staff engagement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Surgical NCHDs working in Irish hospitals reported poor compliance with international best practice for handover and identified potential harms. Process standardisation, appropriate staff training, and the provision of necessary handover-related resources is required at a national level to address this significant patient safety concern.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgeon-Journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland\",\"volume\":\"22 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 338-343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgeon-Journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1479666X2400043X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgeon-Journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1479666X2400043X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:护理交接是患者治疗过程中潜在的危险时刻,如果操作不当,可能会造成伤害。本文通过对爱尔兰全国外科手术医生的调查,评估了当代外科交接班的做法,并评价了有效交接班的障碍和促进因素:方法:在获得伦理批准并对代表性样本进行预测试后,我们向在爱尔兰共和国工作的非顾问医院医生(NCHDs)发放了一份横断面在线调查问卷。调查采用混合方法,通过三角测量设计将数据结合起来:共收到 201 份回复(18.5%)。大多数参与者是高级内科医师或高级注册医师(49.7% 和 37.3%)。大多数人(85.1%)表示在交接过程中至少在某些时候收到的信息是缺失或不正确的。三分之一的受访者表示在过去三个月内曾因交接而险些发生意外,与交接相关的错误导致了轻微(16.9%)、中度(4.9%)或严重(1.5%)的伤害。只有 11.4% 的人接受过正规培训。据报告,阻碍交接工作的因素包括消极态度、缺乏机构支持以及相互竞争的临床活动。促进因素包括流程标准化、改善资源获取途径以及员工参与:在爱尔兰医院工作的外科非传染性疾病防治人员报告称,他们对国际最佳交接实践的遵守情况较差,并发现了潜在的危害。需要在全国范围内实现流程标准化、对员工进行适当培训并提供必要的交接班相关资源,以解决这一重大的患者安全问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Assessing current handover practices in surgery: A survey of non-consultant hospital doctors in Ireland

Background

Handovers of care are potentially hazardous moments in the patient journey and can lead to harm if conducted poorly. Through a national survey of surgical doctors in Ireland, this paper assesses contemporary surgical handover practices and evaluates barriers and facilitators of effective handover.

Methods

After ethical approval and pre-testing with a representative sample, a cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs) working in the Republic of Ireland. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining data using triangulation design.

Main findings

A total of 201 responses were received (18.5%). Most participants were senior house officers or senior registrars (49.7% and 37.3%). Most people (85.1%) reported that information received during handover was missing or incorrect at least some of the time. One-third of respondents reported that a near-miss had occurred as a result of handover within the past three months, and handover-related errors resulted in minor (16.9%), moderate (4.9%), or major (1.5%) harm. Only 11.4% had received any formal training. Reported barriers to handover included negative attitudes, a lack of institutional support, and competing clinical activities. Facilitators included process standardisation, improved access to resources, and staff engagement.

Conclusions

Surgical NCHDs working in Irish hospitals reported poor compliance with international best practice for handover and identified potential harms. Process standardisation, appropriate staff training, and the provision of necessary handover-related resources is required at a national level to address this significant patient safety concern.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
158
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since its establishment in 2003, The Surgeon has established itself as one of the leading multidisciplinary surgical titles, both in print and online. The Surgeon is published for the worldwide surgical and dental communities. The goal of the Journal is to achieve wider national and international recognition, through a commitment to excellence in original research. In addition, both Colleges see the Journal as an important educational service, and consequently there is a particular focus on post-graduate development. Much of our educational role will continue to be achieved through publishing expanded review articles by leaders in their field. Articles in related areas to surgery and dentistry, such as healthcare management and education, are also welcomed. We aim to educate, entertain, give insight into new surgical techniques and technology, and provide a forum for debate and discussion.
期刊最新文献
Enhancements in artificial intelligence for medical examinations: A leap from ChatGPT 3.5 to ChatGPT 4.0 in the FRCS trauma & orthopaedics examination. A boost to concentration or a distracting noise? A systematic review of surgeon and anaesthetist perspectives of the benefit of intra-operative music. List of editors Surgeon ability to predict physical activity and sedentary time: Comparison of self-reported and measured activity Sensitivity and specificity of surgeons' intra-operative diagnosis of appendicitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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