Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-4hvwz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-02T00:13:09.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Improving Quality and Satisfaction With Handover at the Riverside Centre, Hillingdon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2024

Gabriella Bernstein
Affiliation:
Central and Northwest London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Avani Puri*
Affiliation:
Central and Northwest London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Mellisha Padayatchi
Affiliation:
Central and Northwest London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

This project was launched in January 2022 to improve handover between on-call teams and wards, following GMC concerns in 2020 with the out-of-hours handover process. In 2021, a ‘Hospital At Night’ Microsoft Teams evening meeting was successfully introduced. However there remained low satisfaction with other areas of the handover process, including use of paper forms to handover between shifts. The aims of the project were to review the current handover process and improve quality and satisfaction of handover. The target was to improve baseline satisfaction with the handover process by 20% (6 months after change implementation).

Methods

A driver diagram was built to identify factors contributing to quality and satisfaction with handover and develop change ideas.

Qualitative surveys using Likert rating scales were sent to all doctors to explore satisfaction with handover format and quality of information received. Opinions of doctors and the wider MDT were used to develop ideas and evaluate support for change. Surveys were repeated following each cycle.

From July 2022, interventions were introduced and monitored over four QIP cycles. This included an electronic handover in the form of a twice-daily email handover list, which was updated following feedback. Microsoft Teams morning weekend meetings were then introduced and modelled on the existing ‘Hospital At Night' protocol.

Results

Following interventions, the percentage satisfaction with handover format improved from a baseline of 14% and was maintained at an average of 81% across 15 months.

The satisfaction with the quality of handover improved from 36% and was maintained at an average of 97%.

The weekend virtual handover has also been well received with 71% satisfaction. This maintains the satisfaction levels achieved with the ‘Hospital At Night' virtual handover. The involvement of the MDT has been high with 71% of doctors satisfied that the necessary team members are attending.

Conclusion

Introducing a standardised electronic twice-daily handover has improved satisfaction with and quality of handover. It has also improved communication between on-call teams and wards.

The introduction of additional virtual handover meetings at the weekend has also been well received. It allows another opportunity to strengthen clinical leadership and the MDT to work more effectively out-of-hours. Future intervention will be targeted at standardising the content of these meetings and attendance in line with the ‘Hospital At Night' protocol.

We aim to monitor local benefit from these changes, and expand this project to other hospital sites which are not yet using an electronic handover system.

Type
3 Quality Improvement
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.