Implementing a ward-level intervention to improve nursing handover communication with a focus on bedside handover-A qualitative study.

AIM: To improve the effectiveness of nursing clinical handover through a qualitative, tailored communication intervention. DESIGN: A multisite before and after intervention using qualitative ethnography combined with discourse analysis of nursing handover interactions. METHODS: We implemented a tailored ward-based intervention to redesign nursing handover practice with co-constructed recommendations for organisational and cultural change on seven wards across three affiliated metropolitan hospitals between February 2020 and November 2022. The intervention was informed by pre-implementation interviews and focus groups with nursing, medical and allied health staff and patients (n = 151) and observed and/or audio-recorded handover events (n = 233). Post-intervention we conducted interviews and focus groups (n = 79) and observed and/or audio-recorded handover events (n = 129) to qualitatively evaluate impact. RESULTS: Our translational approach resulted in substantial changes post-intervention. Nurses conducted more shift-to-shift handovers at the bedside, with greater patient interaction and better structured and more comprehensive information transfer, supported by revised handover documentation. Redesigned group handovers were focused and efficient, communicating critical patient information. CONCLUSION: Contextualised training combined with changes to ward-level systemic factors impeding communication results in improved nursing handovers. Practice change requires strong executive leadership and project governance, combined with effective ward-level leadership, collaboration and mentoring. The speed and degree of change post-intervention demonstrates the power of interdisciplinary collaborative research between hospital executive, ward leadership and communication specialists. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses are more likely to conduct efficient group handovers and informative, patient-centred bedside handovers in line with policy when they understand the value of handover and have practical strategies to support communication. Communication training should be combined with broader ward-level changes to handover practice tailored to the ward context. A multilevel approach results in more effective practice change. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to the COREQ guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We interviewed patients on study wards pre and post intervention.

The ACCELERATE Plus (assessment and communication excellence for safe patient outcomes) Trial Protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial, cost-benefit analysis, and process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Nurses play an essential role in patient safety. Inadequate nursing physical assessment and communication in handover practices are associated with increased patient deterioration, falls and pressure injuries. Despite internationally implemented rapid response systems, falls and pressure injury reduction strategies, and recommendations to conduct clinical handovers at patients' bedside, adverse events persist. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness, implementation, and cost-benefit of an externally facilitated, nurse-led intervention delivered at the ward level for core physical assessment, structured patient-centred bedside handover and improved multidisciplinary communication. We hypothesise the trial will reduce medical emergency team calls, unplanned intensive care unit admissions, falls and pressure injuries. METHODS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial will be conducted over 52 weeks. The intervention consists of a nursing core physical assessment, structured patient-centred bedside handover and improved multidisciplinary communication and will be implemented in 24 wards across eight hospitals. The intervention will use theoretically informed implementation strategies for changing clinician behaviour, consisting of: nursing executive site engagement; a train-the-trainer model for cascading facilitation; embedded site leads; nursing unit manager leadership training; nursing and medical ward-level clinical champions; ward nurses' education workshops; intervention tailoring; and reminders. The primary outcome will be a composite measure of medical emergency team calls (rapid response calls and 'Code Blue' calls), unplanned intensive care unit admissions, in-hospital falls and hospital-acquired pressure injuries; these measures individually will also form secondary outcomes. Other secondary outcomes are: i) patient-reported experience measures of receiving safe and patient-centred care, ii) nurses' perceptions of barriers to physical assessment, readiness to change, and staff engagement, and iii) nurses' and medical officers' perceptions of safety culture and interprofessional collaboration. Primary outcome data will be collected for the trial duration, and secondary outcome surveys will be collected prior to each step and at trial conclusion. A cost-benefit analysis and post-trial process evaluation will also be undertaken. DISCUSSION: If effective, this intervention has the potential to improve nursing care, reduce patient harm and improve patient outcomes. The evidence-based implementation strategy has been designed to be embedded within existing hospital workforces; if cost-effective, it will be readily translatable to other hospitals nationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ID: ACTRN12622000155796. Date registered: 31/01/2022.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing pressure injury prevention and management guidelines in acute care: A mixed-methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based pressure injury prevention and management is a global health service priority. Low uptake of pressure injury guidelines leads to compromised patient outcomes. Understanding clinicians' and patients' views on the barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines and mapping the identified barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques will inform an end-user and theoretically informed intervention to improve guideline uptake in the acute care setting. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise quantitative and qualitative evidence on i) hospital clinicians' and inpatients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines. DESIGN: A convergent integrated mixed-methods systematic review was conducted using the JBI approach. DATA SOURCE: English language peer-reviewed studies published from 2009 to August 2022 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Library. REVIEW METHODS: Included studies reported: i) acute care hospital clinicians' and patients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. Quantitative data was transformed into qualitised data, then thematically synthesised with qualitative data, comparing clinicians' and patients' views. Barriers and facilitators associated with each main theme were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and allocated to relevant behaviour change techniques. RESULTS: Fifty-five out of 14,488 studies of variable quality (29 quantitative, 22 qualitative, 4 mixed-methods) met the inclusion criteria. Four main themes represent factors thought to influence the implementation of evidence-based guidelines: 1) nurse-led multidisciplinary care, 2) patient participation in care, 3) practicability of implementation and 4) attitudes towards pressure injury prevention and management. Most barriers identified by clinicians were related to the third theme, whilst for patients, there were multiple barriers under theme 2. Barriers were mainly mapped to the Knowledge domain and Environmental Context and Resources domain and were matched to the behaviour change techniques of "instruction on how to perform a behaviour" and "restructuring the physical environment". Most facilitators mentioned by clinicians and patients were related to themes 1 and 2, respectively, and mapped to the Environmental Context and Resources domain. All patient-related attitudes in theme 4 were facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: These review findings highlight the most influential factors related to implementing evidence-based pressure injury care from clinicians' and patients' views and mapping these factors to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques has contributed to developing a stakeholder-tailored implementation intervention in acute care settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42021250885.