Structured Handover in General Surgery: An Audit of Current Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Verbal handover alone compromises patient safety, and supporting written documents significantly increases retention of information, with printed handover sheets being the best at avoiding data loss. The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) has produced guidelines on safe handover practice, in which a minimum dataset is recommended for inclusion when handing over patients to incoming surgical teams, and studies have indicated better adherence to these guidelines when preprinted handover proformas are used. METHODS: All surgical handover sessions were attended for a one-week period, and copies of handover sheets were taken. These were analyzed against RCS guidelines on the essential dataset for safe handover practice. A standardized handover sheet, developed in accordance with these guidelines and designed to encourage impartation of this minimum dataset, was then circulated among members of the surgical department and made readily available on wards. After a 6-week period, a postintervention audit was conducted using the same methods. RESULTS: Striking differences were seen in the quality of information handed over preintervention and postintervention. The documentation of patient location increased significantly (56%-87%, P < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.460-0.151), as did the documentation of important outstanding clinical tasks (45%-89%, P = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.439-0.089). Documentation of blood results increased (P < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.523-0.226), and the proportion of patients for whom the occurrence of a senior review was documented increased from 28% (18) to 85% (45) (P < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.717-0.419) CONCLUSIONS: The use of a structured, computer-generated handover proforma significantly improved compliance with RCS guidelines within the surgical department of our hospital, and we recommend its continued use among on-call surgical teams.

Thromboprophylaxis prescribing among junior doctors: the impact of educational interventions.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in an important aspect of the care of hospitalised patients, for which the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued guidance. Guidance compliance continues to be a concern. Junior doctors are the main group responsible for prescribing thromboprophylaxis. We aimed to compare local pharmacological thromboprophylaxis prescribing against NICE guidelines in a surgical department at a district general hospital, and determine whether interventions aimed at improving compliance were effective. METHODS: Over four months, a two cycle audit of prescribing patterns for VTE prophylaxis was performed using data collected at four intervals: 1. Baseline 2. Following pro-forma introduction and feedback 3. A second baseline data collection. 4. Following VTE prophylaxis teaching. RESULTS: A total of 394 admissions were included. Correct identification and prescribing for at-risk patients ranged between 76 and 93 %, whilst risk assessment documentation and explanation to patients occurred in fewer than 50 and 66 % respectively. Prescribing and risk assessment improved in the first cycle (chi2 = 6.75, p = 0.009 and chi2 = 10.70, p = 0.001 respectively), a consequence of one specialty improving following additional feedback. Teaching was not associated with improvements. Overall compliance with NICE guidelines was achieved in no more than 25 % of admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite junior doctors generally prescribing VTE thromboprophylaxis appropriately, overall compliance with guidelines remained poor regardless of educational interventions. Verbal feedback was the only intervention associated with modest improvements. A pressurised work environment may limit the impact of educational interventions. Guidance simplification or devolving responsibility to other members of staff may improve compliance.