Using SBAR to improve communication in interprofessional rehabilitation teams

An education intervention to improve nursing students' understanding of medication safety

“…One method of providing the required structure is by introducing and encouraging the use of a communication tool such as 'Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation' (SBAR) (Thomas et al, 2009). This communication tool was originally introduced within the healthcare domain to help structure communication primarily between nurses and medical practitioners in acute care settings for highly urgent patient care situations (Leonard et al, 2004) but more recently has been used to structure verbal communication within a variety of interprofessional healthcare teams (Boaro et al, 2010).…”

Rethinking the Discharge Summary

“…Several observational studies have shown that adoption of SBAR templates for handoffs improved communications among interdisciplinary teams and enhanced perceptions of an organizational culture of safety. 23,45–49 Additionally, Vardaman and colleagues observed that use of the SBAR format in handoffs enhanced rapid sharing of clinical contexts, clarified roles and expectations, and increased trust among interdisciplinary team members. 39 The SBAR model also has been shown to facilitate critical thinking and analysis in case discussions in morbidity and mortality conferences.…”

Validation of a modified early warning score‐linked Situation‐Background‐Assessment‐Recommendation communication tool: A mixed methods study

“…The SBAR communication structure is widely used in the USA and has been adopted by the UK's National Health Service for use by all healthcare professionals as the standard structure for communication, as part of the Innovation and Improvement Initiative (NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement ). Although most SBAR research is from the USA (Ardoin & Broussard, ), other countries conducting SBAR research include Australia (d'Agincourt‐Canning, Kissoon, Singal, & Pitfield, ; Clark, Squire, Heyme, Mickle, & Petrie, ; Cunningham et al., ; Dawson, King, & Grantham, ; Street et al., ), Belgium (De Meester, Verspuy, Monsieurs, & Van Bogaert, ), Canada (Andreoli et al., ; Boaro, Fancott, Baker, Velji, & Andreoli, ; Ilan et al., ; Kotsakis, Mercer, Mohseni‐Bod, Gaiteiro, & Agbeko, ; Velji et al., ), China (Wang, Liang, Blazeck, & Greene, ), Germany (Flemming & Hübner, ), UK (Hayes et al., ; Whittingham & Oldroyd, ), Iran (Chaharsoughi, Ahrari, & Alikhah, ), Sweden (Randmaa, Mårtensson, Swenne, & Engström, ), the Netherlands (Ludikhuize, de Jonge, & Goossens, ; Poot, Bruijne, Wouters, Groot, & Wagner, ) and South Africa (Raymond & Harrison, ). However, to our knowledge, SBAR development and validation is rarely reported.…”