Background Nursing handoff is a communication activity with a high risk for loss or omission of information. Efforts to improve handoffs include standardization of the processes and content of handoff communications. Objectives To examine nurses’ perspectives on the structure and organization of change-of-shift handoffs. Methods A qualitative descriptive approach was used to conduct a secondary analysis of focus group data. Thirty-four nurses from 4 critical care units participated in focus groups. Results Three themes emerged: handoff elements are defined by practice and culture; a clear, consistent, identified structure supports handoff; and personal preferences can disrupt handoff. Conclusions A standardized approach to handoff based on unit and organizational needs will be more successful than a broad mandate of content and organization. Individual preference is prevalent and strongly influences the information conveyed and the structure of handoff communication.
Description of Pharmacogenomic Testing Among Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit After Cardiovascular Surgery
Background: Pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing has the potential to provide information on specific drug-metabolizing enzymes that may lead to an absence, reduction, or increase in medication effect in patients. There is a paucity of prospective studies examining PGx testing in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Research Aims: To (1) obtain a PGx panel in a sample of cardiovascular (CV) surgical patients with a planned ICU stay and identify phenotypes, and (2) identify PGx variants that may inform treatment regimens and may warrant prescribing adjustments. Design and Methods: Descriptive, single cohort cross-sectional design. Adult (≥18 years) CV patients with an anticipated postoperative ICU stay were enrolled from a large Midwestern tertiary academic medical center. Eligible patients provided informed consent at the time of their CV clinic appointment; PGx testing was then ordered. Pharmacogenomic testing consisted of the Focused Pharmacogenomics panel which included 10 genes and 55 medications. Results: Of the 272 patients screened, 100 (68% male) patients completed PGx testing (mean age 66.2 ± 9.6 years, mean Acute Physiology, Age and Chronic Health Evaluation III score 76.1 ± standard deviation). Pharmacogenomic results were available in the medical record within a median of 52.4 hours (interquartile range: 33.4-80.3). Pharmacogenomic testing results identified 5 CYP2C19 poor metabolizers, 26 CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers, 5 CYP2C19 ultrarapid metabolizers, 6 CYP2D6 poor metabolizers, 5 CYP2D6 poor to intermediate metabolizers, and 2 CYP2D6 rapid metabolizers identified. Overall, 98% of patients had actionable or potentially actionable PGx results, including 82% for warfarin, 65% for propafenone, 65% for tramadol, 46% for oxycodone, 45% for metoprolol, 33% for clopidogrel, 32% for proton pump inhibitors, 25% for statins, and 12% for haloperidol. Conclusions: A significant portion of patients had identified genetic variants that may warrant changes in medication management during and after CV-ICU stay. It remains to be seen if PGx testing leads to improvements in ICU patient outcomes.
Change‐of‐Shift Nursing Handoff Interruptions: Implications for Evidence‐Based Practice
AbstractBackgroundThe importance of change‐of‐shift handoffs in maintaining patient safety has been well demonstrated. Change‐of‐shift handoff is an important source of data used in surveillance, a nursing intervention aimed at identifying and preventing complications. Surveillance requires the nurse to acquire, process, and synthesize information (cues) encountered during patient care. Interruptions in handoff have been observed but there is a gap in the evidence concerning how interruptions during nurse‐to‐nurse handoff impact the change‐of‐shift handoff process.AimsTo describe registered nurses’ perceptions of interruptions experienced during change‐of‐shift handoff at the bedside in critical care units and analyze the number, type, and source of interruptions during change‐of‐shift handoff at the bedside.MethodsAn exploratory descriptive design was used. One hundred nurse‐to‐nurse handoffs were observed, and four focus groups were conducted. Observation data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and quantitative content analysis. Focus group data were analyzed with qualitative content analysis.Results and FindingsOf the 1,196 interruptions observed, 800 occurred in the communication between the two nurses involved in the handoff. Over 80% (645) of these interruptions were from the nurse receiving handoff and included questions or clarification of information received. About half of the nurses reported that interruptions occurred during handoff. Focus group findings revealed that whether or not something is an interruption is determined by the individual nurse’s appraisal of value added to their knowledge of the patient and/or plan of care at the time of handoff.Linking Evidence to ActionInterruptions during handoff are evaluated as useful or disruptive based on the value to the nurse at the time. Strict structuring or mandating of handoff elements may limit nurses’ ability to communicate information deemed most relevant to the care of a specific unique patient.