Search

Objectives: Communication breakdown is one of the main causes of adverse events in clinical routine, particularly in handover situations. The communication tool SBAR (situation, background, assessment and recommendation) was developed to increase handover quality and is widely assumed to increase patient safety. The objective of this review is to summarise the impact of the implementation of SBAR on patient safety., Design: A systematic review of articles published on SBAR was performed in PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO in January 2017. All original research articles on SBAR fulfilling the following eligibility criteria were included: (1) SBAR was implemented into clinical routine, (2) the investigation of SBAR was the primary objective and (3) at least one patient outcome was reported., Setting: A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care and nursing homes., Participants: A variety of heath professionals including nurses and physicians., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Aspects of patient safety (patient outcomes) defined as the occurrence or incidence of adverse events., Results: Eight studies with a before-after design and three controlled clinical trials performed in different clinical settings met the inclusion criteria. The objectives of the studies were to improve team communication, patient hand-offs and communication in telephone calls from nurses to physicians. The studies were heterogeneous with regard to study characteristics, especially patient outcomes. In total, 26 different patient outcomes were measured, of which eight were reported to be significantly improved. Eleven were described as improved but no further statistical tests were reported, and six outcomes did not change significantly. Only one study reported a descriptive reduction in patient outcomes., Conclusions: This review found moderate evidence for improved patient safety through SBAR implementation, especially when used to structure communication over the phone. However, there is a lack of high-quality research on this widely used communication tool., Trial Registration: none., Competing Interests: Competing interests: WEH has received payment from the AO Foundation Zürich for educational consultations and congress invitations from Mundipharma Basel., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: In obstetrics, patients often experience referral situations between different care professionals. In these multidisciplinary teams, a focus on communication and interprofessional collaboration is needed to ensure care of high quality. Crew resource management team training is increasingly being applied in healthcare settings to improve team performance and coordination. Efforts to improve communication also include tools for standardisation such as SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation). Despite the growing adoption of these interventions, evidence on their effectiveness is limited, especially on patient outcomes. This article describes a study protocol to examine the effectiveness of a crew resource management team training intervention aimed at implementing the SBAR tool for structured communication during patient referrals in obstetrical care., Methods and Analysis: The intervention is rolled out sequentially in five hospitals and surrounding primary care midwifery practices in the Netherlands, using a stepped wedge design. The intervention involves three phases over a period of 24 months: (1) preparation, (2) training and (3) follow-up with repeated measurements. The primary outcomes are perinatal and maternal outcomes calculated using the Adverse Outcome Index. The secondary outcomes are the reaction of participating professionals to the training programme, attitudes towards safety and teamwork (Safety Attitudes Questionnaire), cohesion (Interprofessional Collaboration Measurement Scale), use of the tool for structured communication (self-reported questionnaire) and patient experiences. These secondary outcomes from professional and patient level allow triangulation and an increased understanding of the effect of the intervention on patient outcomes., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the VU University Medical Centre in the Netherlands and the protocol is in accordance with Dutch privacy regulations. Study findings will be presented in publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at scientific conferences., Trial Registration Number: NTR4256; Pre-results., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)