Multicenter Handoff Collaborative

Communication and team-based care are at the heart of patient safety. As anesthesia professionals, we witness this at its very best and worst when transferring patients to and from the operating room (see article by Dr. Lorinc on types of transfers in this issue). In response, we have an opportunity to take a leading role in redesigning the most ubiquitous teaming event in hospitals in a manner that promotes team-based behaviors. The impact of unreliable handoffs on communication failures and medical errors is well known. To combat this issue, mandates by The Joint Commission (TJC) in 2006 and the American Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) in 2013 established requirements for creating a more structured handoff process. However, like much of the quality improvement movement, progress has been slow. This isn’t necessarily due to lack of tactics and technology, but appears to be related to the culture and infrastructure needed to address problems of this scope and complexity. In other words, we need to change our approach to managing our collective efforts

Polymerized bovine hemoglobin solution as a replacement for allogeneic red blood cell transfusion after cardiac surgery: Results of a randomized, double-blind trial

AbstractBackground: Blood loss leading to reduced oxygen-carrying capacity is usually treated with red blood cell transfusions. This study examined the hypothesis that a hemoglobin-based oxygen-carrying solution can serve as an initial alternative to red blood cell transfusion. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind efficacy trial of HBOC-201, a total of 98 patients undergoing cardiac surgery and requiring transfusion were randomly assigned to receive either red blood cell units or HBOC-201 (Hemopure; Biopure Corporation, Cambridge, Mass) for the first three postoperative transfusions. Patients were monitored before and after transfusion, at discharge, and at 3 to 4 weeks after the operation for subsequent red blood cell use, hemodynamics, and clinical laboratory parameters. Results: The use of HBOC-201 eliminated the need for red blood cell transfusions in 34% of cases (95% confidence interval 21%-49%). Patients in the HBOC group received a mean of 1.72 subsequent units of red blood cells; those who received red blood cells only received a mean of 2.19 subsequent units (P =.05). Hematocrit values were transiently lower in the HBOC group but were similar in the two groups at discharge and follow-up. Oxygen extraction was greater in the HBOC group (P =.05). Mean increases in blood pressure were greater in the HBOC group, but not significantly so. Conclusion: HBOC-201 may be an initial alternative to red blood cell transfusions for patients with moderate anemia after cardiac surgery. In a third of cases, HBOC-201 eliminated the need for red blood cell transfusion, although substantial doses were needed to produce this modest degree of blood conservation.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:35-4

Effects of Red-Cell Storage Duration on Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

Some observational studies have reported that transfusion of red-cell units that have been stored for more than 2 to 3 weeks is associated with serious, even fatal, adverse events. Patients undergoingcardiac surgery may be especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of transfusion

Multicenter Handoff Collaborative

Communication and team-based care are at the heart of patient safety. As anesthesia professionals, we witness this at its very best and worst when transferring patients to and from the operating room (see article by Dr. Lorinc on types of transfers in this issue). In response, we have an opportunity to take a leading role in redesigning the most ubiquitous teaming event in hospitals in a manner that promotes team-based behaviors. The impact of unreliable handoffs on communication failures and medical errors is well known. To combat this issue, mandates by The Joint Commission (TJC) in 2006 and the American Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) in 2013 established requirements for creating a more structured handoff process. However, like much of the quality improvement movement, progress has been slow. This isn’t necessarily due to lack of tactics and technology, but appears to be related to the culture and infrastructure needed to address problems of this scope and complexity. In other words, we need to change our approach to managing our collective efforts

Handoff Effectiveness Research in Perioperative Environments (Hero) Design Studio: A Conference Report

Ineffective perioperative handoffs can introduce vulnerabilities in patient safety for multiple reasons, including the potential for incomplete or inaccurate transfer of information, conflicting mental models, and misunderstandings of responsibility and accountability for patient care.1 Handoffs are complex sociotechnical procedures that require coordination between clinicians and may be challenged by distractions, cognitive overload, and poor team dynamics.2 Perioperative handoffs are unique in that they represent a series of care transfers over a short period of time and may occur in a number of different patient care locations, including pre-operative holding areas, post-anesthesia care units (PACUs), ICUs, and inpatient wards

Handoffs and transitions in critical care—understanding scalability: study protocol for a multicenter stepped wedge type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial

Abstract Background The implementation of evidence-based practices in critical care faces specific challenges, including intense time pressure and patient acuity. These challenges result in evidence-to-practice gaps that diminish the impact of proven-effective interventions for patients requiring intensive care unit support. Research is needed to understand and address implementation determinants in critical care settings. Methods The Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care—Understanding Scalability (HATRICC-US) study is a Type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of standardized operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs. This mixed methods study will use a stepped wedge design with randomized roll out to test the effectiveness of a customized protocol for structuring communication between clinicians in the OR and the ICU. The study will be conducted in twelve ICUs (10 adult, 2 pediatric) based in five United States academic health systems. Contextual inquiry incorporating implementation science, systems engineering, and human factors engineering approaches will guide both protocol customization and identification of protocol implementation determinants. Implementation mapping will be used to select appropriate implementation strategies for each setting. Human-centered design will be used to create a digital toolkit for dissemination of study findings. The primary implementation outcome will be fidelity to the customized handoff protocol (unit of analysis: handoff). The primary effectiveness outcome will be a composite measure of new-onset organ failure cases (unit of analysis: ICU). Discussion The HATRICC-US study will customize, implement, and evaluate standardized procedures for OR to ICU handoffs in a heterogenous group of United States academic medical center intensive care units. Findings from this study have the potential to improve postsurgical communication, decrease adverse clinical outcomes, and inform the implementation of other evidence-based practices in critical care settings. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04571749 . Date of registration: October 1, 2020