住院病人的医生交接--病人和医生的结果:系统综述。

Joshua Allen-Dicker, Matthew Kerwin, Joseph S Wallins, Nisha Rao, Rezana Mara, Marina Chilov, Chanan Batra, Susan Chimonas, Deborah Korenstein
{"title":"住院病人的医生交接--病人和医生的结果:系统综述。","authors":"Joshua Allen-Dicker, Matthew Kerwin, Joseph S Wallins, Nisha Rao, Rezana Mara, Marina Chilov, Chanan Batra, Susan Chimonas, Deborah Korenstein","doi":"10.1002/jhm.13583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":94084,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospital medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician inpatient handoffs-Patient and physician outcomes: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Joshua Allen-Dicker, Matthew Kerwin, Joseph S Wallins, Nisha Rao, Rezana Mara, Marina Chilov, Chanan Batra, Susan Chimonas, Deborah Korenstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhm.13583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.13583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.13583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:先前的综述表明,改善住院病人交接的干预措施与患者预后的改善并不一致。本系统综述考察了住院患者交接干预对影响患者和医生的结果的有效性,包括报告时的客观测量(PROSPERO ID: CRD42022309326)。方法:于2022年1月13日检索Pubmed、Embase和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库。我们纳入了实验或准实验研究,这些研究检查了住院医生与报告的患者临床、患者经验、医生经验或成本和利用结果之间的交接沟通。如果研究检查了设施或护理水平之间的交接,或仅报告了患者安全或医生经验的主观衡量标准,则排除研究。使用ROBINS-1和robins -2工具评估偏倚风险。结果:纳入的42项研究中,6项为随机对照试验。大多数研究在学术中心进行(67%),仅涉及居民(64%)。52%的研究使用了教育干预,43%的研究使用了结构性干预,9%的研究两者都使用。16项研究中有3项的不良事件显著改善,7项研究中有3项的医疗差错显著改善,7项研究中有3项的住院时间显著改善。四项研究调查了死亡率,没有一项研究报告有显著改善。同时使用结构和教育成分的研究更频繁地报告了显著的改善。结论:虽然很少有随机试验,但文献对改善交接的影响的研究结果是混杂的。很少有研究报告患者经验或成本/利用结果,或涉及医院医生,这代表了未来研究的潜在领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physician inpatient handoffs-Patient and physician outcomes: A systematic review.

Background: 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).

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusions: 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.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信