Patient safety/original researchDropping the Baton: A Qualitative Analysis of Failures During the Transition From Emergency Department to Inpatient Care
Introduction
Transfers of care among providers have been identified as a major source of medical error,1, 2, 3 yet the contribution of transfers to error remains unclear. To reduce errors, a more complete understanding of the processes involved in transferring patient care is needed. Transferring a patient from one care provider to another requires, at the minimum, communication of clinical information. However, a care transfer is much more than 1-way communication. A well-conducted transfer results in seamless continuation of care and is transparent to participating physicians, patients, and staff. Transfers also play an important role in teaching, promotion of team cohesion, emotional support, socialization, maintenance of social order, and error detection.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Most research on hospital transfers has focused on transfers within a specialty, such as resident-to-resident end-of-shift sign-out.10, 11, 12, 13 The transfer from emergency department (ED) to admitting physicians is little studied,4, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 yet there are several theoretical reasons it may be of particularly high risk. This transfer must span changes in 3 domains—provider, department, and physical location—which may not occur simultaneously. Cultural, linguistic, and social differences between emergency and internal medicine physicians may increase potential for conflict or misunderstanding.16, 17 Often, uncertainty about diagnosis and treatment is high, yet this uncertainty may not be appreciated because of clinical inertia, cognitive biases, face-saving concerns, or a need to “prove” the patient requires admission.4, 9, 18 Results of tests and studies are frequently still pending, creating opportunities for missed follow-up. ED-floor transfers take place in a setting that can be chaotic, crowded, and rife with distractions.19 Finally, the ED-floor transfer occurs early in the hospital course, when patients may be least stable and thus most vulnerable to effects of failed transfers.
A better understanding of failed transfers may help to improve patient safety during this critical point of hospitalization. Accordingly, we aimed to identify vulnerabilities in the ED-floor transfer process through qualitative analysis of failures reported by emergency and internal medicine physicians.
Section snippets
Study Design
We designed a cross-sectional survey study that was pilot tested for clarity and content by chief residents in emergency medicine and internal medicine (see Appendix E1 and E2, available online at http://www.annemergmed.com). Self-administered, anonymous questionnaires were sent by e-mail and distributed at conferences 3 times in March 2007. A lottery for one of 3 $50 Amazon.com gift certificates was a financial incentive for participation. The Human Investigation Committee approved the study
Characteristics of Study Subjects
We received a total of 139 of 264 responses (53%). These included responses from 39 of 60 ED house staff and physician assistants (65%), 21 of 37 hospitalists (57%), and 79 of 167 internal medicine house staff (47%).
Main Results
Of the 139 respondents, 40 (29%) reported that a patient of theirs had experienced an adverse event or near miss after the ED-floor transfer (5 ED, 8 hospitalists, 27 internal medicine house staff). These 40 respondents described 36 specific errors, which were evenly divided among
Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, we did not interview participants in person, review patient records, or observe sign-outs directly. Consequently, we could not verify or obtain further elaboration on reported errors, nor could we obtain the emergency medicine perspective on the perceived errors. Hindsight and recall biases likely led to oversimplification of preceding events and possible misattribution of errors to the transfer process.26 Second, this was a single-institution study
Discussion
This survey of emergency and internal medicine physicians identified numerous vulnerabilities in the transfer of patients from the ED to internal medicine, including flaws in communication, environment, patient flow, information technology, and assignment of responsibility. These vulnerabilities contributed to errors of diagnosis, treatment, and disposition at all points of ED care, starting from the dialogue between patients and emergency physicians and ending in the final transfer of
References (50)
- et al.
Using a computerized sign-out program to improve continuity of inpatient care and prevent adverse events
Jt Comm J Qual Improv.
(1998) - et al.
A randomized, controlled trial evaluating the impact of a computerized rounding and sign-out system on continuity of care and resident work hours
J Am Coll Surg.
(2005) - et al.
Systematic root cause analysis of adverse drug events in a tertiary referral hospital
Jt Comm J Qual Improv.
(2000) - et al.
Risk-adjusted morbidity in teaching hospitals correlates with reported levels of communication and collaboration on surgical teams but not with scale measures of teamwork climate, safety climate, or working conditions
J Am Coll Surg.
(2007) - et al.
Emergency department crowding: consensus development of potential measures
Ann Emerg Med.
(2003) - et al.
Time series analysis of variables associated with daily mean emergency department length of stay
Ann Emerg Med.
(2007) - et al.
Rapid process redesign in a university-based emergency department: decreasing waiting time intervals and improving patient satisfaction
Ann Emerg Med.
(2002) - et al.
Residents report on adverse events and their causes
Arch Intern Med.
(2005) - et al.
Medical errors involving trainees: a study of closed malpractice claims from 5 insurers
Arch Intern Med.
(2007) - et al.
Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care
JAMA
(2007)
A conceptual framework for studying the safety of transitions in emergency care
Goings-on in a CCU: an ethnomethodological account of things that go on in a routine hand-over
Nurs Crit Care
A qualitative study of shift handover practice and function from a socio-technical perspective
J Adv Nurs.
An investigation into the functions of nurses' communication at the inter-shift handover
J Nurs Manag.
The patient handover: a study of its form, function and efficiency
Nurs Stand
Communication in emergency medicine: implications for patient safety
Communication Monographs
Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis
Qual Saf Health Care
Transfers of patient care between house staff on internal medicine wards: a national survey
Arch Intern Med.
Profiles in patient safety: emergency care transitions
Acad Emerg Med.
Need for standardized sign-out in the emergency department: a survey of emergency medicine residency and pediatric emergency medicine fellowship program directors
Acad Emerg Med.
Communicating in the “gray zone”: perceptions about emergency physician hospitalist handoffs and patient safety
Acad Emerg Med.
Lost in transition
How to turn a team of experts into an expert medical team: guidance from the aviation and military communities
Qual Saf Health Care
Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: process and performance effects
Acad Manage J
Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases
Science
Cited by (245)
A checklist intervention for pediatric emergency department transfer of care sign-outs
2024, American Journal of Emergency MedicineNurses' perceptions regarding the impact of teamwork on patient safety culture in the operating room: A qualitative study
2023, Perioperative Care and Operating Room ManagementEffectiveness of handover practices between emergency department and intensive care unit nurses
2023, African Journal of Emergency MedicineOptimizing Pediatric Patient Safety in the Emergency Care Setting
2022, Annals of Emergency MedicineOptimizing Pediatric Patient Safety in the Emergency Care Setting
2022, Journal of Emergency Nursing
Provide feedback on this article at the journal's Web site, www.annemergmed.com.
Supervising editor: Robert L. Wears, MD, MS
Author contributions: LIH, JDS, NRS, RGK, and GYJ conceived the study and designed the survey. NRS, RGK, and GYJ supervised data collection. LIH was responsible for data management, including quality control. LIH, TM, and GYJ coded the data, and JDS, NRS, and RGK participated in the qualitative analysis. LIH drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. LIH takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. Dr. Horwitz was a VA Special Fellow and was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs during part of the time this study was conducted. Dr. Horwitz is now supported by Yale–New Haven Hospital. Neither the Department of Veterans Affairs nor Yale–New Haven Hospital had any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; or preparation, review, and approval of the article.
Earn CME Credit: Continuing Medical Education is available for this article at: www.ACEP-EMedHome.com.
Publication date: Available online June 16, 2008.