↓ Skip to main content

Variation in printed handoff documents: Results and recommendations from a multicenter needs assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hospital Medicine, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Variation in printed handoff documents: Results and recommendations from a multicenter needs assessment
Published in
Journal of Hospital Medicine, May 2015
DOI 10.1002/jhm.2380
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Handoffs of patient care are a leading root cause of medical errors. Standardized techniques exist to minimize miscommunications during verbal handoffs, but studies to guide standardization of printed handoff documents are lacking. To determine whether variability exists in the content of printed handoff documents and to identify key data elements that should be uniformly included in these documents. Pediatric hospitalist services at 9 institutions in the United States and Canada. Sample handoff documents from each institution were reviewed, and structured group interviews were conducted to understand each institution's priorities for written handoffs. An expert panel reviewed all handoff documents and structured group-interview findings, and subsequently made consensus-based recommendations for data elements that were either essential or recommended, including best overall printed handoff practices. Nine sites completed structured group interviews and submitted data. We identified substantial variation in both the structure and content of printed handoff documents. Only 4 of 23 possible data elements (17%) were uniformly present in all sites' handoff documents. The expert panel recommended the following as essential for all printed handoffs: assessment of illness severity, patient summary, action items, situation awareness and contingency plans, allergies, medications, age, weight, date of admission, and patient and hospital service identifiers. Code status and several other elements were also recommended. Wide variation exists in the content of printed handoff documents. Standardizing printed handoff documents has the potential to decrease omissions of key data during patient care transitions, which may decrease the risk of downstream medical errors. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Master 7 9%
Researcher 7 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 9%
Other 20 25%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 27 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#4,724,241
of 27,928,121 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hospital Medicine
#1,046
of 2,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,279
of 283,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hospital Medicine
#19
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,928,121 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.