The Ins and Outs of Change of Shift Handoffs between Nurses: A Communication Challenge
Author(s)
Carroll, John Stephen; Williams, Michele; Gallivan, Theresa M.
DownloadCarroll_The Ins and Outs.pdf (264.2Kb)
OPEN_ACCESS_POLICY
Open Access Policy
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike
Terms of use
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background: Communication breakdowns have been identified as a source of problems in complex work settings such as hospital-based healthcare.
Methods: The authors conducted a multi-method study of change of shift handoffs between nurses, including interviews, survey, audio taping and direct observation of handoffs, posthandoff questionnaires, and archival coding of clinical records.
Results: The authors found considerable variability across units, nurses and, surprisingly, roles. Incoming and outgoing nurses had different expectations for a good handoff: incoming nurses wanted a conversation with questions and eye contact, whereas outgoing nurses wanted to tell their story without interruptions. More experienced nurses abbreviated their reports when incoming nurses knew the patient, but the incoming nurses responded with a large number of questions, creating a contest for control. Nurses' ratings did not correspond to expert ratings of information adequacy, suggesting that nurses consider other functions of handoffs beyond information processing, such as social interaction and learning.
Discussion: These results suggest that variability across roles as information provider versus receiver and experience level (as well as across individual and organisational contexts) are reasons why improvement efforts directed at standardising and improving handoffs have been challenging in nursing and in other healthcare professions as well.
Date issued
2012-02Department
Sloan School of ManagementJournal
BMJ Quality & Safety
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Citation
Carroll, J. S., M. Williams, and T. M. Gallivan. “The Ins and Outs of Change of Shift Handoffs Between Nurses: a Communication Challenge.” BMJ Quality & Safety 21.7 (2012): 586–593.
Version: Author's final manuscript
ISSN
2044-5415
2044-5423