Patient- and Team-Level Characteristics Associated with Handoff Protocol Fidelity in a Hybrid Implementation Study: Results from a Qualitative Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Standardization is an evidence-based approach to improve handoffs. The factors underpinning fidelity (that is, adherence) to standardized handoff protocols are not well specified, which hampers implementation and sustainability efforts. METHODS: The Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) study (2014-2017) involved the creation and implementation of a standardized protocol for operating room (OR)-to-ICU handoffs in two mixed surgical ICUs. The present study used fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to characterize combinations of conditions associated with fidelity to the HATRICC protocol. Conditions were derived from postintervention handoff observations yielding quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: Sixty handoffs had complete fidelity data. Four conditions from the SEIPS 2.0 model were used to explain fidelity: (1) whether the patient was newly admitted to the ICU; (2) presence of an ICU provider; (3) observer ratings of attention-paying by the handoff team; and (4) whether the handoff took place in a quiet environment. None of the conditions were singly necessary or sufficient for high fidelity. Three combinations of conditions were sufficient for fidelity: (1) presence of the ICU provider and high attention ratings; (2) a newly admitted patient, presence of the ICU provider, and quiet environment; and (3) a newly admitted patient, high attention ratings, and quiet environment. These three combinations explained 93.5% of the cases demonstrating high fidelity. CONCLUSION: In a study of OR-to-ICU handoff standardization, multiple combinations of contextual factors were associated with handoff protocol fidelity. Handoff implementation efforts should consider multiple fidelity-promoting strategies that support these combinations of conditions.

The relationship between work and mental health outcomes in Black men after serious injury.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the association between return to work (RTW) and mental health outcomes in Black men in Philadelphia recovering from serious traumatic injuries. METHODS: We analyzed data from 498 Black men aged ≥ 18 years living in Philadelphia who were admitted to a Level I trauma center for injury between January 2013 and June 2017. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between pre-injury occupation, RTW and depression or PTSD 3 months after hospitalization. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, men who had not RTW at follow-up had higher odds of poor mental health outcomes than men who had RTW (OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8, 4.2). Additional significant factors included: younger age, lack of or public health insurance and higher lifetime experiences of racism. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health recovery trajectory of injured Black men living in Philadelphia is associated with RTW and other factors that can influence financial stability and economic resources. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Programmatic strategies that seek to optimize recovery after injury in Black men should include consideration of key structural factors such as employment, financial stability, and the impact of racism-related exposures.