Cargando…

Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the extent to which health professionals perform SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) as intended (ie, with high fidelity) and the extent to which its use improves communication clarity or other quality measures. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Healthstar, PsycI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lo, Lisha, Rotteau, Leahora, Shojania, Kaveh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8685965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34921087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055247
_version_ 1784617925603229696
author Lo, Lisha
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh
author_facet Lo, Lisha
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh
author_sort Lo, Lisha
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To characterise the extent to which health professionals perform SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) as intended (ie, with high fidelity) and the extent to which its use improves communication clarity or other quality measures. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Healthstar, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL to October 2020 and handsearching selected journals. STUDY SELECTION AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Eligible studies consisted of controlled trials and time series, including simple before-after design, assessing SBAR implementation fidelity or the effects of SBAR on communication clarity or other quality measures (eg, safety climate, patient outcomes). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently abstracted data according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on study features, intervention details and study outcomes. We characterised the magnitude of improvement in outcomes as small (<20% relative increase), moderate (20%–40%) or large (>40%). RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies (3 randomised controlled trials, 6 controlled before-after studies, and 19 uncontrolled before-after studies) met inclusion criteria. Of the nine studies assessing fidelity of SBAR use, four occurred in classroom settings and three of these studies reported large improvements. The five studies assessing fidelity in clinical settings reported small to moderate effects. Among eight studies measuring communication clarity, only three reported large improvements and two of these occurred in classroom settings. Among the 17 studies reporting impacts on quality measures beyond communication, over half reported moderate to large improvements. These improvements tended to involve measures of teamwork and culture. Improvements in patient outcomes occurred only with intensive multifaceted interventions (eg, early warning scores and rapid response systems). CONCLUSIONS: High fidelity uptake of SBAR and improvements in communication clarity occurred predominantly in classroom studies. Studies in clinical settings achieving impacts beyond communication typically involved broader, multifaceted interventions. Future efforts to improve communication using SBAR should first confirm high fidelity uptake in clinical settings rather than assuming this has occurred. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018111377.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8685965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86859652022-01-04 Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review Lo, Lisha Rotteau, Leahora Shojania, Kaveh BMJ Open Communication OBJECTIVE: To characterise the extent to which health professionals perform SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) as intended (ie, with high fidelity) and the extent to which its use improves communication clarity or other quality measures. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Healthstar, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL to October 2020 and handsearching selected journals. STUDY SELECTION AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Eligible studies consisted of controlled trials and time series, including simple before-after design, assessing SBAR implementation fidelity or the effects of SBAR on communication clarity or other quality measures (eg, safety climate, patient outcomes). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently abstracted data according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on study features, intervention details and study outcomes. We characterised the magnitude of improvement in outcomes as small (<20% relative increase), moderate (20%–40%) or large (>40%). RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies (3 randomised controlled trials, 6 controlled before-after studies, and 19 uncontrolled before-after studies) met inclusion criteria. Of the nine studies assessing fidelity of SBAR use, four occurred in classroom settings and three of these studies reported large improvements. The five studies assessing fidelity in clinical settings reported small to moderate effects. Among eight studies measuring communication clarity, only three reported large improvements and two of these occurred in classroom settings. Among the 17 studies reporting impacts on quality measures beyond communication, over half reported moderate to large improvements. These improvements tended to involve measures of teamwork and culture. Improvements in patient outcomes occurred only with intensive multifaceted interventions (eg, early warning scores and rapid response systems). CONCLUSIONS: High fidelity uptake of SBAR and improvements in communication clarity occurred predominantly in classroom studies. Studies in clinical settings achieving impacts beyond communication typically involved broader, multifaceted interventions. Future efforts to improve communication using SBAR should first confirm high fidelity uptake in clinical settings rather than assuming this has occurred. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018111377. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-12-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8685965/ /pubmed/34921087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055247 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Communication
Lo, Lisha
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh
Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title_full Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title_fullStr Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title_short Can SBAR be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? A systematic review
title_sort can sbar be implemented with high fidelity and does it improve communication between healthcare workers? a systematic review
topic Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8685965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34921087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055247
work_keys_str_mv AT lolisha cansbarbeimplementedwithhighfidelityanddoesitimprovecommunicationbetweenhealthcareworkersasystematicreview
AT rotteauleahora cansbarbeimplementedwithhighfidelityanddoesitimprovecommunicationbetweenhealthcareworkersasystematicreview
AT shojaniakaveh cansbarbeimplementedwithhighfidelityanddoesitimprovecommunicationbetweenhealthcareworkersasystematicreview