CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 102Hospital Admissions and OutcomesPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsInnovations in Medical Education

Clinical Handover and Handoff in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

Open access
Desmedt, Melissa, Ulenaers, Dorien, Grosemans, Joep, Hellings, Johan, Bergs, Jochen·2021·International Journal for Quality in Health Care
DOI 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa170
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review is to appraise and summarize existing literature on clinical handover. Data sources: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Study selection: Included articles were reviewed independently by the review team. Data extraction: The review team extracted data under the following headers: author(s), year of publication, journal, scope, search strategy, number of studies included, type of studies included, study quality assessment, used definition of handover, healthcare setting, outcomes measured, findings and finally some comments or remarks. Results of data synthesis: First, research indicates that poor handover is associated with multiple potential hazards such as lack of availability of required equipment for patients, information omissions, diagnosis errors, treatment errors, disposition errors and treatment delays. Second, our systematic review indicates that no single tool arises as best for any particular specialty or use to evaluate the handover process. Third, there is little evidence delineating what constitutes best handoff practices. Most efforts facilitated the coordination of care and communication between healthcare professionals using electronic tools or a standardized form. Fourth, our review indicates that the principal teaching methods are role-playing and simulation, which may result in better knowledge transfer to the work environment, better health and patients’ well-being. Conclusions: This review emphasizes the importance of staff education (including simulation-based and team training), non-technical skills and the implementation process of clinical handover in healthcare settings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/intqhc/mzaa170

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The increasing complexity of transitions in healthcare can easily result in poor handover, which undermines care continuity and diagnostic procedures.

    “The increasing complexity of transitions in healthcare can easily result in poor handover, which undermines care continuity and diagnostic procedures [269].”

    From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [269]

    The Discussion links poor handover to inaccurate diagnoses and delays in tests and diagnostic results; the Interventions section reports that better handover practices improved continuity of care. The paper also notes that chronic conditions lead to more healthcare transitions and that complex cases can hinder handover, but it does not establish the claimed causal chain from increasingly complex transitions to poor handover. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Poor handoff can cause several risks, including loss of crucial information that may result in diagnostic errors, and delays in pending tests and results.

    “Poor handoff can cause several risks, including loss of crucial information that may result in diagnostic errors, and delays in pending tests and results [269].”

    From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [269]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 52 · Cited by 102

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Slawomirski L, Auraaen A, Klazinga NS. The economics of patient safety. OECD 2017;26:96.
  2. British Medical Association. Handoffs: implications for nurses. In: Mary Ann Friesen, Susan V. White, Jacqueline F. Byers, Ronda G Hughes (eds). Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2008 April Chapter 34.
  3. Kluger MT, Bullock MFM. Recovery room incidents: a review of 419 reports from the Anaesthetic Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). Anaes- thesia 2002;57:1060-6.
  4. Vlayen A, Hellings J, Claes N et al. A nationwide hospital survey on patient safety culture in Belgian hospitals: setting priorities at the launch of a 5-year patient safety plan. Qual Saf Health Care 2012;21:760-7.
  5. Barach P, Philibert I. The July effect: fertile ground for systems improve- ment. Ann Int Med Am Coll Phys 2011;155:331-2.
  6. Iedema R, Merrick ET, Kerridge R et al. Handover-Enabling Learning in Communication for Safety (HELiCS): a report on achievements at two hospital sites. Med J Aust 2009;190:S133-6.
  7. Siemsen IMD, Madsen MD, Pedersen LF et al. Factors that impact on the safety of patient handovers: an interview study. Scand J Public Health 2012;40:439-48.
  8. Berkenstadt H, Haviv Y, Tuval A et al. Improving handoff communica- tions in critical care: utilizing simulation-based training toward process improvement in managing patient risk. Chest 2008;134:158-62.
  9. Horwitz LI, Moin T, Green ML. Development and implementation of an oral sign-out skills curriculum. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22:1470-4.
  10. Arora VM, Johnson JK, Meltzer DO et al. A theoretical framework and competency-based approach to improving handoffs. Qual Saf Health Care 2008;17:11-14.
  11. Harris J, Schmitt L. National patient safety goals guide safe care. J Nurs Care Qual 2004; 19:88.
  12. Riesenberg LA, Berg K, Berg D et al. Resident and attending physician perception of maladaptive response to stress in residents. Med Educ Online 2014;19:25041.
  13. Manser T, Foster S. Effective handover communication: an overview of research and improvement efforts. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2011;25:181-91.
  14. Cohen MD, Hilligoss PB. The published literature on handoffs in hospi- tals: deficiencies identified in an extensive review. Qual Saf Health Care 2010;19:493-7.
  15. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al. For the PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535-5.
  16. Buchanan IM, Besdine RW. A systematic review of curricular interventions teaching transitional care to physicians-in-training and physicians. Acad Med 2011;86:628-39.
  17. Foster S, Manser T. The effects of patient handoff characteristics on sub- sequent care: a systematic review and areas for future research. Acad Med 2012;87:1105-24.
  18. Masterson MF, Gill RS, Turner SR et al. A systematic review of educational resources for teaching patient handover skills to resident physicians and other healthcare professionals. Can Med Educ J 2013;4:e96-110.
  19. Arora VM, Manjarrez E, Dressler DD et al. Hospitalist handoffs: a sys- tematic review and task force recommendations. J Hosp Med 2009;4: 433-40.
  20. Ong M-S, Coiera E. A systematic review of failures in handoff com- munication during intrahospital transfers. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2011;37:274-84.
  21. Pucher PH, Johnston MJ, Aggarwal R et al. Effectiveness of interven- tions to improve patient handover in surgery: a systematic review. Surgery 2015;158:85-95.
  22. Møller TP, Madsen MD, Fuhrmann L et al. Postoperative handover: char- acteristics and considerations on improvement: a systematic review. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2013;30:229-42.
  23. Gordon M, Hill E, Stojan JN et al. Educational interventions to improve handover in health care: an updated systematic review. Acad Med 2018;93:1234-44.
  24. Müller M, Jürgens J, Redaèlli M et al. Impact of the communication and patient hand-off tool SBAR on patient safety: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2018;8:e022202.
  25. Robertson ER, Morgan L, Bird S et al. Interventions employed to improve intrahospital handover: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care 2014;23:600-7.
  26. Davis J, Roach C, Elliott C et al. Feedback and assessment tools for handoffs: a systematic review. J Grad Med Educ 2017;9:18-32.
  27. Abraham J, Kannampallil T, Patel VL. A systematic review of the literature on the evaluation of handoff tools: implications for research and practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014;21:154-62.
  28. Wood K, Crouch R, Rowland E et al. Clinical handovers between pre- hospital and hospital staff: literature review. Emerg Med J 2015;32: 577-81.
  29. Riesenberg LA, Leitzsch J, Cunningham JM. Nursing handoffs: a system- atic review of the literature. Am J Nurs 2010;110:24-34-quiz35-6.
  30. Hesselink G, Zegers M, Vernooij-Dassen M et al. Improving patient dis- charge and reducing hospital readmissions by using Intervention Mapping. BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:389.
  31. Hesselink G, Schoonhoven L, Barach P et al. Improving patient handovers from hospital to primary care: a systematic review. Ann Int Med Am Coll Phys 2012;157:417-28.
  32. Jeffcott SA, Evans SM, Cameron PA et al. Improving measurement in clinical handover. Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:272-7.
  33. Patterson ES, Wears RL. Patient handoffs: standardized and reliable mea- surement tools remain elusive. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2010;36: 52-61.
  34. Mardis T, Mardis M, Davis J et al. Bedside shift-to-shift handoffs: a systematic review of the literature. J Nurs Care Qual 2016;31: 54-60.
  35. Gordon M. Non-technical skills training to enhance patient safety. Clin Teach 2013;10:170-5.
  36. Hellesø R, Lorensen M, Sorensen L. Challenging the information gap- the patients transfer from hospital to home health care. Int J Med Inform 2004;73:569-80.
  37. Collins SA, Stein DM, Vawdrey DK et al. Content overlap in nurse and physician handoff artifacts and the potential role of electronic health records: a systematic review. J Biomed Inform 2011;44:704-12.
  38. Lee J, Mast M, Humbert J et al. Teaching handoff communication to nursing students: a teaching intervention and lessons learned. Nurse Educ 2016;41:189-93.
  39. Gaffney S, Farnan JM, Hirsch K et al. The Modified, Multi-patient Observed Simulated Handoff Experience (M-OSHE): assessment and feed- back for entering residents on handoff performance. J Gen Intern Med 2016;31:438-41.

Authors
Desmedt, M., Ulenaers, D., Grosemans, J., Hellings, J., & Bergs, J.
Affiliations
  • Hasselt University (BE)
  • Hogeschool PXL (BE)
Corresponding author
Desmedt, Melissa
ORCID
Venue
International Journal for Quality in Health Care
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2020-12-16
Volume
33
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3677
DOI
10.1093/intqhc/mzaa170
OpenAlex
W3111855657
Cited by
102
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • International Journal for Quality in Health Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Universiteit Hasselt
  • Province of Limburg
  • European Regional Development Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
patient handover, handoff errors, care coordination, health professional communication, simulation-based training, role play, employee training, non-technical skills, team training, patient safety
MeSH terms
Systematic Reviews as Topic, Delivery of Health Care, Health Facilities, Health Personnel, Humans, Patient Handoff

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