Gijs Hesselink

Improving patient handovers from hospital to primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND Evidence shows that suboptimum handovers at hospital discharge lead to increased rehospitalizations and decreased quality of health care. PURPOSE To systematically review interventions that aim to improve patient discharge from hospital to primary care. DATA SOURCES PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched for studies published between January 1990 and March 2011. STUDY SELECTION Randomized, controlled trials of interventions that aimed to improve handovers between hospital and primary care providers at hospital discharge. DATA EXTRACTION Two reviewers independently abstracted data on study objectives, setting and design, intervention characteristics, and outcomes. Studies were categorized according to methodological quality, sample size, intervention characteristics, outcome, statistical significance, and direction of effects. DATA SYNTHESIS Of the 36 included studies, 25 (69.4%) had statistically significant effects in favor of the intervention group and 34 (94.4%) described multicomponent interventions. Effective interventions included medication reconciliation; electronic tools to facilitate quick, clear, and structured summary generation; discharge planning; shared involvement in follow-up by hospital and community care providers; use of electronic discharge notifications; and Web-based access to discharge information for general practitioners. Statistically significant effects were mostly found in reducing hospital use (for example, rehospitalizations), improvement of continuity of care (for example, accurate discharge information), and improvement of patient status after discharge (for example, satisfaction). LIMITATIONS Heterogeneity of the interventions and study characteristics made meta-analysis impossible. Most studies had diffuse aims and poor descriptions of the specific intervention components. CONCLUSION Many interventions have positive effects on patient care. However, given the complexity of interventions and outcome measures, the literature does not permit firm conclusions about which interventions have these effects. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE The European Union, the Framework Programme of the European Commission.

Organizational culture: an important context for addressing and improving hospital to community patient discharge

Background:Organizational culture is seen as having a growing impact on quality and safety of health care, but its impact on hospital to community patient discharge is relatively unknown. Objectives:To explore aspects of organizational culture to develop a deeper understanding of the discharge process. Research Design:A qualitative study of stakeholders in the discharge process. Grounded Theory was used to analyze the data. Subjects:In 5 European Union countries, 192 individual and 25 focus group interviews were conducted with patients and relatives, hospital physicians, hospital nurses, general practitioners, and community nurses. Results:Three themes emerged representing aspects of organizational culture: a fragmented hospital to primary care interface, undervaluing administrative tasks relative to clinical tasks in the discharge process, and lack of reflection on the discharge process or process improvement. Nine categories were identified: inward focus of hospital care providers, lack of awareness to needs, skills, and work patterns of the professional counterpart, lack of a collaborative attitude, relationship between hospital and primary care providers, providing care in a “here and now” situation, administrative work considered to be burdensome, negative attitude toward feedback, handovers at discharge ruled by habits, and appreciating and integrating new practices. Conclusions:On the basis of the data, we hypothesize that the extent to which hospital care providers value handovers and the outreach to community care providers is critical to effective hospital discharge. Community care providers often are insufficiently informed about patient outcomes. Ongoing challenges with patient discharge often remain unspoken with opportunities for improvement overlooked. Interventions that address organizational culture as a key factor in discharge improvement efforts are needed.

Improving patient discharge and reducing hospital readmissions by using Intervention Mapping

BackgroundThere is a growing impetus to reorganize the hospital discharge process to reduce avoidable readmissions and costs. The aim of this study was to provide insight into hospital discharge problems and underlying causes, and to give an overview of solutions that guide providers and policy-makers in improving hospital discharge.MethodsThe Intervention Mapping framework was used. First, a problem analysis studying the scale, causes, and consequences of ineffective hospital discharge was carried out. The analysis was based on primary data from 26 focus group interviews and 321 individual interviews with patients and relatives, and involved hospital and community care providers. Second, improvements in terms of intervention outcomes, performance objectives and change objectives were specified. Third, 220 experts were consulted and a systematic review of effective discharge interventions was carried out to select theory-based methods and practical strategies required to achieve change and better performance.ResultsIneffective discharge is related to factors at the level of the individual care provider, the patient, the relationship between providers, and the organisational and technical support for care providers. Providers can reduce hospital readmission rates and adverse events by focusing on high-quality discharge information, well-coordinated care, and direct and timely communication with their counterpart colleagues. Patients, or their carers, should participate in the discharge process and be well aware of their health status and treatment. Assessment by hospital care providers whether discharge information is accurate and understood by patients and their community counterparts, are important examples of overcoming identified barriers to effective discharge. Discharge templates, medication reconciliation, a liaison nurse or pharmacist, regular site visits and teach-back are identified as effective and promising strategies to achieve the desired behavioural and environmental change.ConclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive guiding framework for providers and policy-makers to improve patient handover from hospital to primary care.

Searching for the missing pieces between the hospital and primary care: mapping the patient process during care transitions

Background Safe patient transitions depend on effective communication and a functioning care coordination process. Evidence suggests that primary care physicians are not satisfied with communication at transition points between inpatient and ambulatory care, and that communication often is not provided in a timely manner, omits essential information, or contains ambiguities that put patients at risk. Objective Our aim was to demonstrate how process mapping can illustrate current handover practices between ambulatory and inpatient care settings, identify existing barriers and facilitators to effective transitions of care, and highlight potential areas for quality improvement. Methods We conducted focus group interviews to facilitate a process mapping exercise with clinical teams in six academic health centres in the USA, Poland, Sweden, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. Findings At a high level, the process of patient admission to the hospital through the emergency department, inpatient care, and discharge back in the community were comparable across sites. In addition, the process maps highlighted similar barriers to providing information to primary care physicians, inaccurate or incomplete information on referral and discharge, a lack of time and priority to collaborate with counterpart colleagues, and a lack of feedback to clinicians involved in the handovers. Conclusions Process mapping is effective in bringing together key stakeholders and makes explicit the mental models that frame their understanding of the clinical process. Exploring the barriers and facilitators to safe and reliable patient transitions highlights opportunities for further improvement work and illustrates ideas for best practices that might be transferrable to other settings.

Quality and safety of hospital discharge: a study on experiences and perceptions of patients, relatives and care providers

OBJECTIVE To identify barriers experienced and perceived at discharge by physicians, nurses, patients and relatives. DESIGN We developed questionnaires based on focus group interviews with hospital and community care providers, and individual interviews with patients and relatives. A survey was conducted among patients, relatives and related nurses and physicians from hospital and community care. SETTING One university hospital and the related community care area in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS Thirty health-care providers and eight patients and/or relatives participated in focus group and individual interviews. Questionnaires were returned by 344 health-care providers and 206 patients and relatives. RESULTS Information from the hospital to community care is often incomplete, unclear and delayed. Especially hospital physicians (52%) and general practitioners (GPs; 63%) experience the quality of information exchanged from the hospital to the GP as poor. Coordination of care is often frustrated by a lack of care provider knowledge and collaboration. Hospital physicians (47%) and GPs (71%) feel that hospital physicians are often not sufficiently aware of the patients home situation. Respectively, 59 and 81% experience that the GP is often not clearly informed about expected tasks and responsibilities at discharge. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study that provides a clear picture of the experiences and perceptions of stakeholders regarding handovers at hospital discharge. Lack of knowledge, understanding and interest between hospital and community care providers are important causes for ineffective and unsafe discharge. The study suggests that improvement efforts should be focused more on these aspects, as primary conditions for improving hospital discharge.

The key actor: a qualitative study of patient participation in the handover process in Europe

Background Patient safety experts have postulated that increasing patient participation in communications during patient handovers will improve the quality of patient transitions, and that this may reduce hospital readmissions. Choosing strategies that enhance patient safety through improved handovers requires better understanding of patient experiences and preferences for participation. Objective The aim of this paper is to explore the patients’ experiences and perspectives related to the handovers between their primary care providers and the inpatient hospital. Methods A qualitative secondary analysis was performed, based on individual and focus group patient interviews with 90 patients in five European countries. Results The analysis revealed three themes: patient positioning in the handover process; prerequisites for patient participation and patient preferences for the handover process. Patients’ participation ranged from being the key actor, to sharing the responsibility with healthcare professional(s), to being passive participants. For active participation patients required both personal and social resources as well as prerequisites such as information and respect. Some patients preferred to be the key actor in charge; others preferred their healthcare professionals to be the key actors in the handover. Conclusions Patients’ participation is related to the healthcare system, the activity of healthcare professionals’ and patients’ capacity for participation. Patients prefer a handover process where the responsibility is clear and unambiguous. Healthcare organisations need a clear and well-considered system of responsibility for handover processes, that takes into account the individual patients need of clarity, and support in relation to his/hers own recourses.

Stakeholder perspectives on handovers between hospital staff and general practitioners: an evaluation through the microsystems lens

Background Much of the research on improving patient handovers has focused on enhancing communication within the hospital system, but there have been relatively few efforts aimed at addressing the challenges at the interface between the hospital and the primary care setting. Methods A qualitative thematic analysis using a clinical microsystems lens applied to 28 semi-structured key stakeholder interviews in the Netherlands. Data were organised into seven ‘virtual’ clinical microsystem datasets composed of patients, hospital-based physicians, hospital-based nurses and community-based general practitioners. Results Five themes that contributed to effective or ineffective handovers emerged from our analysis: (1) lack of adequate information; (2) healthcare professionals’ availability and opportunity for personal contact; (3) feedback, teaching and protocols related to handovers; (4) information technology facilitated communication solutions; and (5) the role and responsibility of patients. Our analysis suggests that each healthcare professional attempted to provide the best care possible, but did this largely in isolation, and without the benefit of the knowledge and expertise of the other members of the microsystem. Conclusions The microsystem approach offers an innovative organisational construct and approach to assess the gaps in ‘hospital to community’ patient handovers, by viewing the hospital to the community interface as a clinical microsystem continuum. Our application of the microsystem approach confirms and extends earlier findings about the impact of barriers on the continuity and safety of patient transitions and their impact on the quality of patient care.

Improving the governance of patient safety in emergency care: a systematic review of interventions

Objectives To systematically review interventions that aim to improve the governance of patient safety within emergency care on effectiveness, reliability, validity and feasibility. Design A systematic review of the literature. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PsychInfo were searched for studies published between January 1990 and July 2014. We included studies evaluating interventions relevant for higher management to oversee and manage patient safety, in prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) organisations and hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). Two reviewers independently selected candidate studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. Studies were categorised according to study quality, setting, sample, intervention characteristics and findings. Results Of the 18 included studies, 13 (72%) were non-experimental. Nine studies (50%) reported data on the reliability and/or validity of the intervention. Eight studies (44%) reported on the feasibility of the intervention. Only 4 studies (22%) reported statistically significant effects. The use of a simulation-based training programme and well-designed incident reporting systems led to a statistically significant improvement of safety knowledge and attitudes by ED staff and an increase of incident reports within EDs, respectively. Conclusions Characteristics of the interventions included in this review (eg, anonymous incident reporting and validation of incident reports by an independent party) could provide useful input for the design of an effective tool to govern patient safety in EMS organisations and EDs. However, executives cannot rely on a robust set of evidence-based and feasible tools to govern patient safety within their emergency care organisation and in the chain of emergency care. Established strategies from other high-risk sectors need to be evaluated in emergency care settings, using an experimental design with valid outcome measures to strengthen the evidence base.

Measuring a caring culture in hospitals: a systematic review of instruments

Objective To identify instruments or components of instruments that aim to measure aspects of a caring culture-shared beliefs, norms and values that direct professionals and managers to act caring in hospitals, and to evaluate their psychometric properties. Design Systematic review. Data sources PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science and the International bibliography of the Social Sciences. Study selection Peer-reviewed articles describing (components of) instruments measuring aspects of a caring culture in a hospital setting. Studies had to report psychometric data regarding the reliability or validity of the instrument. Potentially useful instruments that were identified after the title and abstract scan were assessed on relevance by an expert panel (n=12) using the RAND-modified Delphi procedure. Results Of the 6399 references identified, 75 were examined in detail. 7 studies each covering a unique instrument met our inclusion criteria. On average, 24% of the instruments items were considered relevant for measuring aspects of the hospitals caring culture. Studies showed moderate-to-high validity and reliability scores. Validity was addressed for 6 of the 7 instruments. Face, content (90%) and construct (60%) validity were the most frequently reported psychometric properties described. One study (14%) reported discriminant validity of the instrument. Reliability data were available for all of the instruments. Internal consistency was the most frequently reported psychometric property for the instruments and demonstrated by: a Cronbachs α coefficient (80%), subscale intercorrelations (60%), and item–total correlations (40%). Conclusions The ultimate standard for measuring a caring culture in hospitals does not exist. Existing instruments provide partial coverage and lack information on discriminant validity, responsiveness and feasibility. Characteristics of the instruments included in this review could provide useful input for the design of a reliable and valid instrument for measuring a caring culture in hospitals.

Evidence-based interventions to reduce adverse events in hospitals: a systematic review of systematic reviews

Objective To provide an overview of effective interventions aimed at reducing rates of adverse events in hospitals. Design Systematic review of systematic reviews. Data sources PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched for systematic reviews published until October 2015. Study selection English-language systematic reviews of interventions aimed at reducing adverse events in hospitals, including studies with an experimental design and reporting adverse event rates, were included. Two reviewers independently assessed each studys quality and extracted data on the study population, study design, intervention characteristics and adverse patient outcomes. Results Sixty systematic reviews with moderate to high quality were included. Statistically significant pooled effect sizes were found for 14 types of interventions, including: (1) multicomponent interventions to prevent delirium; (2) rapid response teams to reduce cardiopulmonary arrest and mortality rates; (3) pharmacist interventions to reduce adverse drug events; (4) exercises and multicomponent interventions to prevent falls; and (5) care bundle interventions, checklists and reminders to reduce infections. Most (82%) of the significant effect sizes were based on 5 or fewer primary studies with an experimental study design. Conclusions The evidence for patient-safety interventions implemented in hospitals worldwide is weak. The findings address the need to invest in high-quality research standards in order to identify interventions that have a real impact on patient safety. Interventions to prevent delirium, cardiopulmonary arrest and mortality, adverse drug events, infections and falls are most effective and should therefore be prioritised by clinicians.