4.2 Article

Quality of post-operative patient handover in the post-anaesthesia care unit: a prospective analysis

Journal

ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
Volume 58, Issue 2, Pages 192-197

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/aas.12249

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundAnaesthesiology plays a key role in promoting safe perioperative care. This includes the perioperative phase in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) where problems with incomplete information transfer may have a negative impact on patient safety and can lead to patient harm. The objective of this study was to analyse information transfer during post-operative handovers in the PACU. MethodsWith a self-developed checklist including 59 items the information transfer during post-operative handovers was documented and subsequently compared with patient information in anaesthesia records during a 2-month period. ResultsA total number of 790 handovers with duration of 7349s was analysed. Few items were transferred in most of the cases such as type of surgery (97% of the cases), regional anaesthesia (94% of the cases) and cardiac instability (93% of the cases). However, some items were rarely transferred, such as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (7% of the cases), initiation of post-operative pain management (12% of the cases), antibiotic therapy (14% of the cases) and fluid management (15% of the cases). There was a slight correlation between amount of information transferred and duration of post-operative handovers (r=0.5). ConclusionThe study shows that post-operative handovers in the PACU are in most cases incomplete. It appears useful to optimise the post-operative handover process, for example by implementing a standardised handover checklist. (C) 2013 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available