ADVERTISEMENT

Transfer Training

The Hospitalist. 2007 October;2007(10):

Five-Point Training

  1. Give the subject importance and emphasize that it is a priority; 2. Recognize and teach what information to convey. The first step is recognizing which information is not important to mention;
  2. Teach trainees what being explicit means. Teach them to use concrete language rather than vague generalities: “The patient is breathing 98% on 2 liters of oxygen” versus “The patient’s fine”;
  3. Teach trainees to communicate to provide anticipatory guidance/contingency planning: What you think is going to happen with this patient in the next hours and how the new provider should respond to that; and
  4. Provide ongoing evaluation and feedback of residents’ performance.

Be Explicit, Create a Model

“Many residency programs have a standardized form that residents use to sign out to the cross-covering physician,” says Sunil Kripalani, MD, MSc, director of the Section of Hospital Medicine at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. “However, there is often not much attention given to the actual process of transferring patient information to another physician.”

For example, residents may tack the form up to a wall or leave it on a computer, he says, because this may be more convenient than meeting for a verbal, face-to-face sign out. “It is important that residents receive training about how to best sign out patients, so it is viewed as a priority area,” he says.

The initial training should cover best practices for hand-offs, says Dr. Kripalani. “It may not be intuitive, especially to new residents, that poorly executed hand-offs can be perilous,” he says.

It is also important to teach trainees how to best convey that information. “Sometimes you’ll think more is better,” says Dr. Horwitz, “but that’s not the case; people turn off or get distracted. There is a tension between providing enough information to take care of the person overnight versus providing too much information.”

Modeling best behaviors is also an important part of training, says Jay Routson, MD, a teaching hospitalist and clinical assistant professor of medicine in the Idaho State University Department of Family Medicine in Pocatello, Idaho. Dr. Routson, trained in internal medicine, thinks opportunities to train residents and students in transfer of care are also a chance to model what you expect of them.

This is particularly important in Dr. Routson’s circumstances because of the nature of his university’s family medicine residency: It is conducted at a number of locations. At morning report on the first day of a block, residents who have been on the previous rotation are to transfer patient care to the incoming residents. But they may have already left for their new pediatrics or NICU assignments, for instance, not only elsewhere in Pocatello but perhaps in Boise or Logan.

Another problem in his program’s training for transfer of care, says Dr. Routson, is that less-experienced residents are not always aware of the important things to check. What one resident thinks is important to follow up on the next resident may put at the bottom of his or her list.

“I think that you have to model the importance you place on [hand-offs],” says Dr. Routson. “You have to set aside time during the day and make it a priority. Model the behavior when you’re checking out to a new attending, make sure the residents and interns know it’s a priority, especially early in the academic year.”

Yale’s Example

Leora Horwitz, MD, and her colleagues, Tannaz Moin, MD, and Michael L. Green, MD, from the department of internal medicine at the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn., developed a sign out curriculum for medical house staff.8

In August 2006, the one-hour curriculum was implemented within the internal medicine residency program at three hospital sites. Teaching strategies included facilitated discussion, modeling, and observed individual practice with feedback and an emphasis was put on interactive communication, a mnemonic to facilitate structured sign out, consistent inclusion of key content items such as anticipatory guidance (contingency planning), and the use of concrete language. In 34 post-course evaluations the mean score was 4.44 ± 0.61 on a one-to-five scale and the participants’ perceived usefulness of the format was 4.46 ± 0.78. Participants rated their comfort with providing oral sign outs significantly higher after attending the session than before.