I-PASS Adherence and Implications for Future Handoff Training

Helen K. Hughes, Janet Rose Serwint, Jennifer K. O'Toole, Nancy D. Spector, Thuy L. Ngo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: A formal handoff process, such as the I-PASS handoff program, can improve communication about patients among residents. Faculty observation of resident handoffs has served as the primary method for documenting adherence to I-PASS, and little is known about residents' use when they are not being observed. Objective: We determined how frequently pediatric residents use I-PASS when not being observed. Methods: We implemented I-PASS in the 2016-2017 academic year and anonymously surveyed residents (December 2016 and June 2017), asking them how they perceive the effectiveness of I-PASS at enhancing patient safety, their frequency of I-PASS use when not observed, co-residents' frequency of use, and open-ended questions regarding factors affecting use. Results: Fifty-one (52%) and 50 (51%) of 99 eligible residents completed the December and June surveys, respectively. All respondents thought I-PASS had some effectiveness in enhancing patient safety. In December, only 6 (12%) residents stated they used I-PASS more than 75% of the time and reported providing a synthesis statement during handoffs more than 75% of the time. The results were similar for both surveys. Commonly cited reasons for not using I-PASS included time (n = 30), prior knowledge of patients (n = 20), and patients with limited complexity (n = 9). Conclusions: While most residents thought I-PASS was effective at enhancing patient safety, many reported that they do not use all 5 elements in most of their handoffs when not being observed. Barriers reported included time, familiarity with patients, and limited patient complexity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)301-306
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of graduate medical education
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2019

Fingerprint

Patient Safety
Communication
Observation
Pediatrics
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

I-PASS Adherence and Implications for Future Handoff Training. / Hughes, Helen K.; Serwint, Janet Rose; O'Toole, Jennifer K.; Spector, Nancy D.; Ngo, Thuy L.

In: Journal of graduate medical education, Vol. 11, No. 3, 01.06.2019, p. 301-306.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hughes, Helen K. ; Serwint, Janet Rose ; O'Toole, Jennifer K. ; Spector, Nancy D. ; Ngo, Thuy L. / I-PASS Adherence and Implications for Future Handoff Training. In: Journal of graduate medical education. 2019 ; Vol. 11, No. 3. pp. 301-306.
@article{f5660b552bed49cb95ea3c5f9fc70071,
title = "I-PASS Adherence and Implications for Future Handoff Training",
abstract = "Background: A formal handoff process, such as the I-PASS handoff program, can improve communication about patients among residents. Faculty observation of resident handoffs has served as the primary method for documenting adherence to I-PASS, and little is known about residents' use when they are not being observed. Objective: We determined how frequently pediatric residents use I-PASS when not being observed. Methods: We implemented I-PASS in the 2016-2017 academic year and anonymously surveyed residents (December 2016 and June 2017), asking them how they perceive the effectiveness of I-PASS at enhancing patient safety, their frequency of I-PASS use when not observed, co-residents' frequency of use, and open-ended questions regarding factors affecting use. Results: Fifty-one (52{\%}) and 50 (51{\%}) of 99 eligible residents completed the December and June surveys, respectively. All respondents thought I-PASS had some effectiveness in enhancing patient safety. In December, only 6 (12{\%}) residents stated they used I-PASS more than 75{\%} of the time and reported providing a synthesis statement during handoffs more than 75{\%} of the time. The results were similar for both surveys. Commonly cited reasons for not using I-PASS included time (n = 30), prior knowledge of patients (n = 20), and patients with limited complexity (n = 9). Conclusions: While most residents thought I-PASS was effective at enhancing patient safety, many reported that they do not use all 5 elements in most of their handoffs when not being observed. Barriers reported included time, familiarity with patients, and limited patient complexity.",
author = "Hughes, {Helen K.} and Serwint, {Janet Rose} and O'Toole, {Jennifer K.} and Spector, {Nancy D.} and Ngo, {Thuy L.}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4300/JGME-D-18-01086.1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "301--306",
journal = "Journal of graduate medical education",
issn = "1949-8349",
publisher = "University of Finance and Management",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - I-PASS Adherence and Implications for Future Handoff Training

AU - Hughes, Helen K.

AU - Serwint, Janet Rose

AU - O'Toole, Jennifer K.

AU - Spector, Nancy D.

AU - Ngo, Thuy L.

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Background: A formal handoff process, such as the I-PASS handoff program, can improve communication about patients among residents. Faculty observation of resident handoffs has served as the primary method for documenting adherence to I-PASS, and little is known about residents' use when they are not being observed. Objective: We determined how frequently pediatric residents use I-PASS when not being observed. Methods: We implemented I-PASS in the 2016-2017 academic year and anonymously surveyed residents (December 2016 and June 2017), asking them how they perceive the effectiveness of I-PASS at enhancing patient safety, their frequency of I-PASS use when not observed, co-residents' frequency of use, and open-ended questions regarding factors affecting use. Results: Fifty-one (52%) and 50 (51%) of 99 eligible residents completed the December and June surveys, respectively. All respondents thought I-PASS had some effectiveness in enhancing patient safety. In December, only 6 (12%) residents stated they used I-PASS more than 75% of the time and reported providing a synthesis statement during handoffs more than 75% of the time. The results were similar for both surveys. Commonly cited reasons for not using I-PASS included time (n = 30), prior knowledge of patients (n = 20), and patients with limited complexity (n = 9). Conclusions: While most residents thought I-PASS was effective at enhancing patient safety, many reported that they do not use all 5 elements in most of their handoffs when not being observed. Barriers reported included time, familiarity with patients, and limited patient complexity.

AB - Background: A formal handoff process, such as the I-PASS handoff program, can improve communication about patients among residents. Faculty observation of resident handoffs has served as the primary method for documenting adherence to I-PASS, and little is known about residents' use when they are not being observed. Objective: We determined how frequently pediatric residents use I-PASS when not being observed. Methods: We implemented I-PASS in the 2016-2017 academic year and anonymously surveyed residents (December 2016 and June 2017), asking them how they perceive the effectiveness of I-PASS at enhancing patient safety, their frequency of I-PASS use when not observed, co-residents' frequency of use, and open-ended questions regarding factors affecting use. Results: Fifty-one (52%) and 50 (51%) of 99 eligible residents completed the December and June surveys, respectively. All respondents thought I-PASS had some effectiveness in enhancing patient safety. In December, only 6 (12%) residents stated they used I-PASS more than 75% of the time and reported providing a synthesis statement during handoffs more than 75% of the time. The results were similar for both surveys. Commonly cited reasons for not using I-PASS included time (n = 30), prior knowledge of patients (n = 20), and patients with limited complexity (n = 9). Conclusions: While most residents thought I-PASS was effective at enhancing patient safety, many reported that they do not use all 5 elements in most of their handoffs when not being observed. Barriers reported included time, familiarity with patients, and limited patient complexity.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068381724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068381724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4300/JGME-D-18-01086.1

DO - 10.4300/JGME-D-18-01086.1

M3 - Article

C2 - 31210861

AN - SCOPUS:85068381724

VL - 11

SP - 301

EP - 306

JO - Journal of graduate medical education

JF - Journal of graduate medical education

SN - 1949-8349

IS - 3

ER -