A multi-center prospective cohort study of patient transfers from the intensive care unit to the hospital ward
Abstract
Purpose To provide a 360-degree description of ICU-to-ward transfers.Methods Prospective cohort study of 451 adults transferred from a medical-surgical ICU to a hospital ward in 10 Canadian hospitals July 2014-January 2016. Transfer processes documented in the medical record. Patient (or delegate) and provider (ICU/ward physician/nurse) perspectives solicited by survey 24-72 h after transfer.Results Medical records (100%) and survey responses (ICU physicians-80%, ICU nurses-80%, ward physicians-46%, ward nurses-64%, patients-74%) were available for most transfers. The median time from initiation to completion of transfer was 25 h (IQR 6-52). ICU physicians and nurses reported communicating with counterparts via telephone (78 and 75%) when transfer was requested (82 and 24%) or accepted (31 and 59%) and providing more elements of clinical information than ward physicians (mean 4.7 vs. 3.9, p < 0.001) and nurses (5.0 vs. 4.4, p < 0.001) reported receiving. Patients were more likely to report satisfaction with the transfer when they received more information (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.18-1.48), had their questions addressed (OR 3.96, 95% CI 1.33-11.84), met the ward physician prior to transfer (OR 4.61, 95% CI 2.90-7.33), and were assessed by a nurse within 1 h of ward arrival (OR 4.70, 95% CI 2.29-9.66). Recommendations for improvement included having a documented care plan travel with the patient (all stakeholders), standardized face-to-face handover (physicians), avoiding transfers at shift change (nurses) and informing patients about pending transfers in advance (patients).Conclusions ICU-to-ward transfers are characterized by failures of patient flow and communication; experienced differently by patients, ICU/ward physicians and nurses, with distinct suggestions for improvement.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prior studies demonstrate notable gaps in information reported by ICU providers and what is understood by ward providers.
“Prior studies demonstrate notable gaps in information that is reported by ICU providers and what is understood by ward providers, emphasizing the need for standardized written communication that accompanies the patient during the entire transfer process and mitigates the loss of essential clinical information [10].”
From Improving Communication in Intensive Care Unit to Ward Transitions: Protocol for Multisite National Implementation of the ICU-PAUSE Handoff Tool (2023) · cites this paper as [10]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 70
- Authors
- Stelfox, H. T., Leigh, J. P., Dodek, P. M., Turgeon, A. F., Forster, A. J., Lamontagne, F., Fowler, R. A., Soo, A., & Bagshaw, S. M.
- Affiliations
- Alberta Health Services (CA)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Université Laval (CA)
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Stelfox, Henry T.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Intensive Care Medicine
- Published
- 2017-08-29
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1485-1494
- ISSN
- 0342-4642 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-1238
- OpenAlex
- W2753170989
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11
- FWCI
- 8.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Intensive Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Canadian Frailty Network (CORE 2013-12A)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Keywords
- ICU-to-ward transfer, patient handover, patient flow, interprofessional communication, patient satisfaction, clinical documentation, shift change, nurse handover
- MeSH terms
- Canada, Continuity of Patient Care, Female, Hospital Units, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Interprofessional Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Transfer, Professional-Patient Relations, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Time Factors, Patient Satisfaction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review