PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15101454

Nursing handovers: do we really need them?

Abstract

AIM: This study attempts to address the content of nursing handover when compared with formal documentation sources. BACKGROUND: The nursing handover has attracted criticism in the literature in relation to its continuing role in modern nursing. Criticisms include those related to time expenditure, content, accuracy and the derogatory terms in which patients are sometimes being discussed. METHODS: Twenty-three handovers, covering all shifts, from one general medical ward were audio-taped. Their content was analysed and classified according to where, within a ward's documentation systems, the information conveyed could be located. FINDINGS: Results showed that almost 84.6% of information discussed could be located within existing ward documentation structures and 9.5% of information discussed was not relevant to ongoing patient care. Only 5.9% of handover content involved discussions related to ongoing care or ward management issues that could not be recorded in an existing documentation source. LIMITATIONS: The results of this study are representative of only one ward in one Australian Hospital. Specific documentation sources were also not checked to determine their content. CONCLUSION: Streamlining the nursing handover may improve the quality of the information presented and reduce the amount of time spent in handover.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Amanda Sexton, Connie Chan, Malcolm Elliott, John Stuart, Rohan Jayasuriya, Patrick Crookes. 2004. Nursing handovers: do we really need them?. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2004.00415.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗