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.

Shared decision making in chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study of the impact of communication practices on treatment decisions for older patients.

BACKGROUND: Effective interpersonal communication is critical for shared decision-making (SDM). Previous SDM communication training in nephrology has lacked context-specific evidence from ethnographic analysis of SDM interactions with older patients considering treatment options of end stage kidney disease (ESKD). This study explores communication strategies in SDM discussions in nephrology, specifically focusing on older patients considering dialysis as kidney replacement therapy (KRT). METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study analysing naturally-occurring audio-recorded clinical interactions (n = 12) between Australian kidney doctors, patients aged 60+, and carers. Linguistic ethnography and qualitative socially-oriented functional approaches were used for analysis. RESULTS: Two types of communication strategies emerged: (1) Managing and advancing treatment decisions: involving active checking of knowledge, clear explanations of options, and local issue resolution. (2) Pulling back: Deferring or delaying decisions through mixed messaging. Specifically for non-English speaking patients, pulling back was further characterised by communication challenges deferring decision-making including ineffective issue management, and reliance on family as interpreters. Age was not an explicit topic of discussion among participants when it came to making decisions about KRT but was highly relevant to treatment decision-making. Doctors appeared reluctant to broach non-dialysis conservative management, even when it appears clinically appropriate. Conservative care, an alternative to KRT suitable for older patients with co-morbidities, was only explicitly discussed when prompted by patients or carers. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the impact of different communication strategies on SDM discussions in nephrology. This study calls for linguistic-informed contextualised communication training and provides foundational evidence for nephrology-specific communication skills training in SDM for KRT among older patients. There is urgent need for doctors to become confident and competent in discussing non-dialysis conservative management. Further international research should explore naturally-occurring SDM interactions in nephrology with other vulnerable groups to enhance evidence and training integration.

Improving patient-centred care through a tailored intervention addressing nursing clinical handover communication in its organizational and cultural context.

AIMS: To increase the quality and safety of patient care, many hospitals have mandated that nursing clinical handover occur at the patient's bedside. This study aims to improve the patient-centredness of nursing handover by addressing the communication challenges of bedside handover and the organizational and cultural practices that shape handover. DESIGN: Qualitative linguistic ethnographic design combining discourse analysis of actual handover interactions and interviews and focus groups before and after a tailored intervention. METHODS: Pre-intervention we conducted interviews with nursing, medical and allied health staff (n = 14) and focus groups with nurses and students (n = 13) in one hospital's Rehabilitation ward. We recorded handovers (n = 16) and multidisciplinary team huddles (n = 3). An intervention of communication training and recommendations for organizational and cultural change was delivered to staff and championed by ward management. After the intervention we interviewed nurses and recorded and analyzed handovers. Data were collected from February to August 2020. Ward management collected hospital-acquired complication data. RESULTS: Notable changes post-intervention included a shift to involve patients in bedside handovers, improved ward-level communication and culture, and an associated decrease in reported hospital-acquired complications. CONCLUSIONS: Effective change in handover practices is achieved through communication training combined with redesign of local practices inhibiting patient-centred handovers. Strong leadership to champion change, ongoing mentoring and reinforcement of new practices, and collaboration with nurses throughout the change process were critical to success. IMPACT: Ineffective communication during handover jeopardizes patient safety and limits patient involvement. Our targeted, locally designed communication intervention significantly improved handover practices and patient involvement through the use of informational and interactional protocols, and redesigned handover tools and meetings. Our approach promoted a ward culture that prioritizes patient-centred care and patient safety. This innovative intervention resulted in an associated decrease in hospital-acquired complications. The intervention has been rolled out to a further five wards across two hospitals.

Older patients and dialysis shared decision-making. Insights from an ethnographic discourse analysis of interviews and clinical interactions.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyse the perspectives and communication practices of kidney clinicians and older patients (aged 60 +) during collaborative education and decision-making about dialysis. METHODS: This qualitative study drew on pluralistic data sources and analytical approaches investigating elicited semi-structured interviews (n = 31) with doctors (n = 8), nurses (n = 8) and patients (n = 15), combined with ethnographic observations, written artefacts and audio-recorded naturally-occurring interactions (n = 23, education sessions n = 4; consultations n = 19) in a tertiary Australian kidney outpatient clinic. Data were analysed for themes and linguistic discourse features. RESULTS: Five themes were identified across all data sources: 1) lost opportunity in education; 2) persistent disease knowledge gaps; 3) putting up with dialysis; 4) perceived and real involvement in decision-making and 5) complex role of family as decision-making brokers. CONCLUSION: As the first study to complement interviews with evidence from naturally-occurring kidney interactions, this study balances the perspectives of how older patients and their clinicians view chronic kidney disease education, with how decision-making about dialysis is reflected in practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The study provides suggestions for contextualized, multi-perspectives formal and informal training for improving decision-making about dialysis, spanning from indications to boost communication efficiency, to reducing unexplained jargon, incorporating patient navigators and exploring different dialysis modalities.