Patient safety and sociotechnical considerations for electronic handover tools in an Australian ehealth landscape
- PMID: 20543388
Patient safety and sociotechnical considerations for electronic handover tools in an Australian ehealth landscape
Abstract
The Australian Commission for Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) coordinates national improvements in a range of complex health system problems including clinical handover, and has funded a range of handover improvement projects in Australia. One of these, the SafeTECH project in South Australia has developed guidelines for safe use of electronic handover tools. These guidelines were developed using evidence from three hospital case studies into the use of an electronic tool to support different types of shift-to-shift handover. This paper provides an overview of the project, and highlights challenges for patient safety in the design and use of electronic tools to support clinical handover in a busy clinical environment. The paper then considers these challenges within the broader context of the Australian ehealth landscape. Australia's National eHealth Transition Authority (NEHTA) is actively developing ehealth standards and infrastructure requirements for the electronic collection and secure exchange of health information. The paper argues for flexible standardisation in the design and implementation of electronic handover tools to ensure that all key dimensions of the challenges faced in ensuring patient safety are addressed.
Similar articles
-
A standard operating protocol (SOP) and minimum data set (MDS) for nursing and medical handover: considerations for flexible standardization in developing electronic tools.Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;143:501-6. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009. PMID: 19380983
-
Improving measurement in clinical handover.Qual Saf Health Care. 2009 Aug;18(4):272-7. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2007.024570. Qual Saf Health Care. 2009. PMID: 19651930
-
Identification of patient information corruption in the intensive care unit: using a scoring tool to direct quality improvements in handover.Crit Care Med. 2009 Nov;37(11):2905-12. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a96267. Crit Care Med. 2009. PMID: 19770735
-
[Patient handover involves numerous safety risks].Ugeskr Laeger. 2011 May 16;173(20):1412-6. Ugeskr Laeger. 2011. PMID: 21586244 Review. Danish.
-
Effective handover communication: an overview of research and improvement efforts.Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2011 Jun;25(2):181-91. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2011.02.006. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2011. PMID: 21550543 Review.
Cited by
-
Challenges of patient handover process in healthcare services: A systematic review.J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Sep 30;8:173. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_460_18. eCollection 2019. J Educ Health Promot. 2019. PMID: 31867358 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Reasons (not) to Spend a Few Billions More on EHRs: How Human Factors Research Can Help.Yearb Med Inform. 2014 Aug 15;9(1):90-6. doi: 10.15265/IY-2014-0033. Yearb Med Inform. 2014. PMID: 25123727 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical