The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of the communication and patient hand-off tool SBAR on patient safety: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: Communication breakdown is one of the main causes of adverse events in clinical routine, particularly in handover situations. The communication tool SBAR (situation, background, assessment and recommendation) was developed to increase handover quality and is widely assumed to increase patient safety. The objective of this review is to summarise the impact of the implementation of SBAR on patient safety. Design: A systematic review of articles published on SBAR was performed in PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO in January 2017. All original research articles on SBAR fulfilling the following eligibility criteria were included: (1) SBAR was implemented into clinical routine, (2) the investigation of SBAR was the primary objective and (3) at least one patient outcome was reported. Setting: A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care and nursing homes. Participants: A variety of heath professionals including nurses and physicians. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Aspects of patient safety (patient outcomes) defined as the occurrence or incidence of adverse events. Results: Eight studies with a before–after design and three controlled clinical trials performed in different clinical settings met the inclusion criteria. The objectives of the studies were to improve team communication, patient hand-offs and communication in telephone calls from nurses to physicians. The studies were heterogeneous with regard to study characteristics, especially patient outcomes. In total, 26 different patient outcomes were measured, of which eight were reported to be significantly improved. Eleven were described as improved but no further statistical tests were reported, and six outcomes did not change significantly. Only one study reported a descriptive reduction in patient outcomes. Conclusions: This review found moderate evidence for improved patient safety through SBAR implementation, especially when used to structure communication over the phone. However, there is a lack of high-quality research on this widely used communication tool. Trial registration: none
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System
(2000) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/9728 · Cited by 14,044
Brennan, T. A., Leape, L. L., Laird, N. M., Hebert, L., Localio, A. R., Lawthers, A. G., Newhouse, J. P., Weiler, P. C., & Hiatt, H. H. (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199102073240604 · Cited by 4,627
Leonard, M. (2004) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qhc.13.suppl_1.i85 · Cited by 2,322
To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System in 1999.
Stefl, M. E. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 1,738
Armijo‐Olivo, S., Stiles, C. R., Hagen, N. A., Biondo, P. D., & Cummings, G. G. (2012) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01516.x · Cited by 1,539
Brennan, T. A. (2004) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2002.003822 · Cited by 942
SBAR: A Shared Mental Model for Improving Communication Between Clinicians
Haig, K. M., Sutton, S., & Whittington, J. (2006) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety · doi:10.1016/s1553-7250(06)32022-3 · Cited by 744
Patient Safety: Achieving a New Standard for Care
(2004) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/10863 · Cited by 510
Systematic Review of Handoff Mnemonics Literature
Riesenberg, L. A., Leitzsch, J., & Little, B. W. (2009) · American Journal of Medical Quality · doi:10.1177/1062860609332512 · Cited by 361
Cited by
Clinical Handover and Handoff in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews
Desmedt, M., Ulenaers, D., Grosemans, J., Hellings, J., & Bergs, J. (2021) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzaa170 · Cited by 102
Frequency and Nature of Communication and Handoff Failures in Medical Malpractice Claims
Humphrey, K. E., Sundberg, M., Milliren, C. E., Graham, D. A., & Landrigan, C. P. (2022) · Journal of Patient Safety · doi:10.1097/pts.0000000000000937 · Cited by 72
Principles for Real-World Implementation of Bedside Predictive Analytics Monitoring
Moorman, L. P. (2021) · Applied Clinical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1735183 · Cited by 26
Azfar, S. M., Saeed, S., Masood, S., Azim, S. R., Baig, M., & Malik, M. G. R. (2025) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-025-06840-5 · Cited by 9
Collaborative competencies in gerontology: perspective of health undergraduate students
Curado, P. F., Santos, L. F., Silva, I. P. D., Maciel, E. D. S., Pereira, R. B. D. L., & Nunes, D. P. (2022) · Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica · doi:10.1590/1981-5271v46.3-20220012.ing · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Müller, M., Jürgens, J., Redaèlli, M., Klingberg, K., Hautz, W. E., & Stock, S.
- Venue
- BMJ Open
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2018-08
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e022202
- ISSN
- 2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2888458560
- Cited by
- 498
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 9.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of the communication and patient hand-off tool SBAR on patient safety: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022202
- The paper
- Müller, M., Jürgens, J., Redaèlli, M., Klingberg, K., Hautz, W. E., & Stock, S. (2018). Impact of the communication and patient hand-off tool SBAR on patient safety: a systematic review. BMJ Open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022202
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.