QSHC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Quality and Safety in Health Care 2005;14:393
Copyright © 2005 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Topic Collections
Right arrow QSHC Q lines
Right arrowRelated Articles

Quality Lines

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


PATIENT SIGN-OUT COMMUNICATION FAILURES
The transfer of care for hospitalised patients routinely uses written and verbal communication ("sign-outs" or "hand-overs"). This study of resident trainees in a teaching hospital describes how communication failures during this process can affect patient care. Omitted content (eg medications, active problems, and pending tests) or failure prone communication processes (eg lack of face-to-face discussion) emerged as major categories of failed communication. In nearly all cases these failures led to uncertainty during patient–care decisions, which at times resulted in suboptimal care. Junior doctors preferred thorough but relevant face-to-face verbal sign-outs that reviewed anticipated issues, together with legible, accurate, updated written sign-out sheets that included standard patient content, such as code status or active and anticipated medical problems. These authors provide a taxonomy of communication failures and potential improvements, which may improve the quality and safety of patient care.
See p 401 and 394

Overestimation of clinical diagnostic performance caused by low autopsy rates
Most studies that assess how well clinicians . . . [Full text of this article]


Related Articles

Re-framing continuity of care for this century
I Philibert and D C Leach
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 394-396. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

More necropsies will improve patient care: has the case been made?
H Guly
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 397. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Tensions in public health policy: patient engagement, evidence-based public health and health inequalities
R Thomson, M Murtagh, and F-M Khaw
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 398-400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis
V Arora, J Johnson, D Lovinger, H J Humphrey, and D O Meltzer
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 401-407. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Overestimation of clinical diagnostic performance caused by low necropsy rates
K G Shojania, E C Burton, K M McDonald, and L Goldman
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 408-413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Hearing the patient’s voice? Factors affecting the use of patient survey data in quality improvement
E Davies and P D Cleary
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 428-432. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The OutPatient Experiences Questionnaire (OPEQ): data quality, reliability, and validity in patients attending 52 Norwegian hospitals
A M Garratt, Ø A Bjærtnes, U Krogstad, and P Gulbrandsen
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 433-437. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Hospital quality improvement in context: a multilevel analysis of staff job evaluations
U Krogstad, D Hofoss, M Veenstra, P Gulbrandsen, and P Hjortdahl
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 438-442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2005 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.