Evaluation of a Paper-Based Checklist versus an Electronic Handover Tool Based on the Situation Background Assessment Recommendation (SBAR) Concept in Patients after Surgery for Congenital Heart Disease

Abstract

(1) Background: we compare a new SBAR based electronic handover tool versus a paper-based checklist for handover in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). (2) Methods: this is a randomized, observational study of 40 electronic vs. 40 paper checklist handovers after pediatric cardiac surgery, with a 48 items checklist for comparison of reporting frequencies and notification of disturbances and noise. PICU staff satisfaction was evaluated by a 12-item questionnaire. (3) Results: in 14 out of 40 cases, there were problems with data processing (incomplete or no data processing). Some item groups (e.g., hemodynamics) were consistently reported at higher frequencies than other groups. Items not specifically asked for did not get reported. Some items, automatically processed in the SBAR handover page, did not get reported. Many handovers suffered a noisy and distracting atmosphere. There was no difference in staff satisfaction between the two handover approaches. Nurses were highly unsatisfied with the general approach by which the handover was performed. (4) Conclusions: human error appears to be a main factor for unreliable data processing. Software is still too complicated, and multitasking is a stressful and error prone event. Handover is a complex task with many factors required for a successful completion.

Transferring patient information using the SBAR communication tool for interpretation

“…He hopes that adopting and using SBAR with the review results will significantly improve patient safety both nationally and internationally. Rehm et al (2021) conducted a randomised observational study, compared transfer protocols, and evaluated the paper and electronic forms of the SBAR communication tool. Electronic data transmission is the future of healthcare, and the implementation of such tools must be accompanied by an iterative improvement cycle.…”

Practical Progress of SBAR Communication Model-Related Teaching in Clinical Teaching

“…It includes four elements: individual situation (Situation, S), background (Background, B), assessment (Assessment, A), recommendation (Recommendation, R). The SBAR communication mode has been widely used in clinical work at home and abroad, such as in the intensive care unit, the coronary care unit (CCU), the emergency department, the surgical anesthesia recovery room, the critical patient handover, and other departments [2][3] , and it has gradually become an interdisciplinary communication mode. The standardized communication mode not only significantly improves the prognosis of patients, but it also reduces medical costs and increases patient satisfaction.…”

The design and application of an intensive care unit point-of-care nursing handover checklist based on the situation, background, assessment, and recommendation technique

“…The accuracy of the nursing handover directly affects the safety and effectiveness of nursing activities (1)(2)(3)(4). The nursing handover procedure in an intensive care unit (ICU) involves the transfer of complicated information concerning, for example, changes in patient medical conditions, various monitoring and treatment devices, catheters, treatment approaches, and the combined use of drugs, all of which must be discussed during this process (5). Although all departments have shifts, the mode is not uniform, some are oral, some are written, and there are differences in the content and the handover order.…”