A systematic review on the transfer of information during nurse transitions in care

Cheryl Holly and Eileen B Poletick

Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2014, vol. 23, issue 17-18, 2387-2396

Abstract: Aims and objectives To examine the qualitative evidence on dynamics of knowledge transfer during transitions in care in acute care hospitals. Background The most common transition between nurse care providers is the intershift handoff. As these handoffs tend to be time‐consuming and costly, it is important to understand the dynamics of the transfer of information at this time and, by extension, improve quality and safety. Design Systematic Review. Methods Qualitative studies conducted between 1988 and 2012 were sought. A comprehensive four‐stage search strategy identified 125 qualitative studies that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 50 were retrieved for appraisal. Retrieved papers were assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological quality prior to inclusion in the review using a standardised critical appraisal instrument. Results The final sample consisted of 29 qualitative studies. This represented more than 800 nursing handoffs and 300 nurse interviews. Sixteen categories were identified, which were then subjected to a meta‐synthesis to produce a single comprehensive set of synthesised findings. Conclusion The evidence shows the handoff to be a complex, social interaction highly sensitive to context and cultural norms, an activity essential to multiple functions that extend beyond quality and safety. They are subject to wide variability in both the methods used and the kind of information that is handed off. Notably, the elucidation of the different ways in which individual nurses act as gatekeepers and influence patient care is a major finding of this review. Relevance to clinical practice The results of this systemic review provide evidence that a consistent guideline may provide an optimal shift report given the findings of this review that information transferred may be random and variable, inconsistent and incongruent, inaccurate or absent.

Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12365

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:17-18:p:2387-2396

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Clinical Nursing from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().