Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?

Abstract Background Good clinical handover is critical to safe medical care. Little research has investigated handover in rural settings. In a remote setting where nurses and medical students give telephone handover to an aeromedical retrieval service, we developed a tool by which the receiving clin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Malcolm Moore, Chris Roberts, Jonathan Newbury, Jim Crossley
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2017-11-01
Series:BMC Medical Education
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12909-017-1067-0
id doaj-4290e793221f46ed8c41363ea4202380
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4290e793221f46ed8c41363ea42023802020-11-25T01:42:59ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202017-11-011711910.1186/s12909-017-1067-0Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?Malcolm Moore0Chris Roberts1Jonathan Newbury2Jim Crossley3Rural Clinical School, Australian National University Medical SchoolNorthern Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, University of SydneyRural Clinical School, University of AdelaideMedical School, University of SheffieldAbstract Background Good clinical handover is critical to safe medical care. Little research has investigated handover in rural settings. In a remote setting where nurses and medical students give telephone handover to an aeromedical retrieval service, we developed a tool by which the receiving clinician might assess the handover; and investigated factors impacting on the reliability and validity of that assessment. Methods Researchers consulted with clinicians to develop an assessment tool, based on the ISBAR handover framework, combining validity evidence and the existing literature. The tool was applied ‘live’ by receiving clinicians and from recorded handovers by academic assessors. The tool’s performance was analysed using generalisability theory. Receiving clinicians and assessors provided feedback. Results Reliability for assessing a call was good (G = 0.73 with 4 assessments). The scale had a single factor structure with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.8). The group mean for the global score for nurses and students was 2.30 (SD 0.85) out of a maximum 3.0, with no difference between these sub-groups. Conclusions We have developed and evaluated a tool to assess high-stakes handover in a remote setting. It showed good reliability and was easy for working clinicians to use. Further investigation and use is warranted beyond this setting.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12909-017-1067-0Clinical handoverWork-based assessmentCommunication skillsMedical education
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Malcolm Moore
Chris Roberts
Jonathan Newbury
Jim Crossley
spellingShingle Malcolm Moore
Chris Roberts
Jonathan Newbury
Jim Crossley
Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
BMC Medical Education
Clinical handover
Work-based assessment
Communication skills
Medical education
author_facet Malcolm Moore
Chris Roberts
Jonathan Newbury
Jim Crossley
author_sort Malcolm Moore
title Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
title_short Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
title_full Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
title_fullStr Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
title_full_unstemmed Am I getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
title_sort am i getting an accurate picture: a tool to assess clinical handover in remote settings?
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Education
issn 1472-6920
publishDate 2017-11-01
description Abstract Background Good clinical handover is critical to safe medical care. Little research has investigated handover in rural settings. In a remote setting where nurses and medical students give telephone handover to an aeromedical retrieval service, we developed a tool by which the receiving clinician might assess the handover; and investigated factors impacting on the reliability and validity of that assessment. Methods Researchers consulted with clinicians to develop an assessment tool, based on the ISBAR handover framework, combining validity evidence and the existing literature. The tool was applied ‘live’ by receiving clinicians and from recorded handovers by academic assessors. The tool’s performance was analysed using generalisability theory. Receiving clinicians and assessors provided feedback. Results Reliability for assessing a call was good (G = 0.73 with 4 assessments). The scale had a single factor structure with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.8). The group mean for the global score for nurses and students was 2.30 (SD 0.85) out of a maximum 3.0, with no difference between these sub-groups. Conclusions We have developed and evaluated a tool to assess high-stakes handover in a remote setting. It showed good reliability and was easy for working clinicians to use. Further investigation and use is warranted beyond this setting.
topic Clinical handover
Work-based assessment
Communication skills
Medical education
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12909-017-1067-0
work_keys_str_mv AT malcolmmoore amigettinganaccuratepictureatooltoassessclinicalhandoverinremotesettings
AT chrisroberts amigettinganaccuratepictureatooltoassessclinicalhandoverinremotesettings
AT jonathannewbury amigettinganaccuratepictureatooltoassessclinicalhandoverinremotesettings
AT jimcrossley amigettinganaccuratepictureatooltoassessclinicalhandoverinremotesettings
_version_ 1725033750367043584