Doctors' handovers in hospitals: a literature review

Michelle Raduma Tomas, Rhona Flin, Steven J. Yule, David Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

71 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim To review studies on hospital doctors' handovers to identify the methods and main findings.


Method A literature search of electronic databases Medline and Embase (via Ovid) was conducted against a set of inclusion criteria.


Results A total of 32 papers were identified. The most common methods of studying handovers were observations and interviews, which typically focused on the sign-out (ie, handover meeting). This is just one stage of the handover process: pre- and posthandover phases were rarely examined. Although providing useful descriptive information, the studies rarely evaluated the quality of handover practices. While communication is generally recognised as the critical component, there has been little training of this skill.


Conclusion The handover literature does not fully identify where communication failures typically occur or influencing conditions, thus hampering the design of effective handover training and tools. A systematic analysis of all the stages of doctors' handovers is required.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)128-133
Number of pages6
JournalBMJ Quality & Safety
Volume20
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2011

Fingerprint

Databases
Interviews

Cite this

Doctors' handovers in hospitals : a literature review. / Raduma Tomas, Michelle; Flin, Rhona; Yule, Steven J.; Williams, David.

In: BMJ Quality & Safety, Vol. 20, No. 2, 02.2011, p. 128-133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Raduma Tomas, Michelle ; Flin, Rhona ; Yule, Steven J. ; Williams, David. / Doctors' handovers in hospitals : a literature review. In: BMJ Quality & Safety. 2011 ; Vol. 20, No. 2. pp. 128-133.
@article{cbd0350f62a94d24b82d2b2d84cda180,
title = "Doctors' handovers in hospitals: a literature review",
abstract = "Aim To review studies on hospital doctors' handovers to identify the methods and main findings. Method A literature search of electronic databases Medline and Embase (via Ovid) was conducted against a set of inclusion criteria. Results A total of 32 papers were identified. The most common methods of studying handovers were observations and interviews, which typically focused on the sign-out (ie, handover meeting). This is just one stage of the handover process: pre- and posthandover phases were rarely examined. Although providing useful descriptive information, the studies rarely evaluated the quality of handover practices. While communication is generally recognised as the critical component, there has been little training of this skill. Conclusion The handover literature does not fully identify where communication failures typically occur or influencing conditions, thus hampering the design of effective handover training and tools. A systematic analysis of all the stages of doctors' handovers is required.",
author = "{Raduma Tomas}, Michelle and Rhona Flin and Yule, {Steven J.} and David Williams",
year = "2011",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1136/bmjqs.2009.034389",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "128--133",
journal = "BMJ Quality & Safety",
issn = "2044-5415",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Doctors' handovers in hospitals

T2 - a literature review

AU - Raduma Tomas, Michelle

AU - Flin, Rhona

AU - Yule, Steven J.

AU - Williams, David

PY - 2011/2

Y1 - 2011/2

N2 - Aim To review studies on hospital doctors' handovers to identify the methods and main findings. Method A literature search of electronic databases Medline and Embase (via Ovid) was conducted against a set of inclusion criteria. Results A total of 32 papers were identified. The most common methods of studying handovers were observations and interviews, which typically focused on the sign-out (ie, handover meeting). This is just one stage of the handover process: pre- and posthandover phases were rarely examined. Although providing useful descriptive information, the studies rarely evaluated the quality of handover practices. While communication is generally recognised as the critical component, there has been little training of this skill. Conclusion The handover literature does not fully identify where communication failures typically occur or influencing conditions, thus hampering the design of effective handover training and tools. A systematic analysis of all the stages of doctors' handovers is required.

AB - Aim To review studies on hospital doctors' handovers to identify the methods and main findings. Method A literature search of electronic databases Medline and Embase (via Ovid) was conducted against a set of inclusion criteria. Results A total of 32 papers were identified. The most common methods of studying handovers were observations and interviews, which typically focused on the sign-out (ie, handover meeting). This is just one stage of the handover process: pre- and posthandover phases were rarely examined. Although providing useful descriptive information, the studies rarely evaluated the quality of handover practices. While communication is generally recognised as the critical component, there has been little training of this skill. Conclusion The handover literature does not fully identify where communication failures typically occur or influencing conditions, thus hampering the design of effective handover training and tools. A systematic analysis of all the stages of doctors' handovers is required.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs.2009.034389

DO - 10.1136/bmjqs.2009.034389

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 128

EP - 133

JO - BMJ Quality & Safety

JF - BMJ Quality & Safety

SN - 2044-5415

IS - 2

ER -