Cited by 147Hospital Admissions and OutcomesPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsInterprofessional Education and Collaboration

Failures in communication and information transfer across the surgical care pathway: interview study

Nagpal, Kamal, Arora, Sonal, Vats, Amit, Wong, Helen W, Sevdalis, Nick, Vincent, Charles, Moorthy, Krishna·2012·BMJ Quality & Safety

Abstract

Background and objectives Effective communication is imperative to safe surgical practice. Previous studies have typically focused upon the operating theatre. This study aimed to explore the communication and information transfer failures across the entire surgical care pathway. Methods Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 members of the multidisciplinary team (seven surgeons, five anaesthetists and six nurses) in an acute National Health Service trust. Participants' views regarding information transfer and communication failures at each phase of care, their causes, effects and potential interventions were explored. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and submitted to emergent theme analysis. Sampling ceased when categorical and theoretical saturation was achieved. Results Preoperatively, lack of communication between anaesthetists and surgeons was the most common problem (13/18 participants). Incomplete handover from the ward to theatre (12/18) and theatre to recovery (15/18) were other key problems. Work environment, lack of protocols and primitive forms of information transfer were reported as the most common cause of failures. Participants reported that these failures led to increased morbidity and mortality. Healthcare staff were strongly supportive of the view that standardisation and systematisation of communication processes was essential to improve patient safety. Conclusions This study suggests communication fai…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000886

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Incomplete or inaccurate handoffs are a source of subsequent medical errors and patient injury, particularly for patients undergoing major surgery.

    “Incomplete or inaccurate handoffs are a source of subsequent medical errors and patient injury,1–3 particularly for patients undergoing major surgery.4–7”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nagpal, K., Arora, S., Vats, A., Wong, H. W., Sevdalis, N., Vincent, C., & Moorthy, K.
Affiliations
St Mary's Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Arora, Sonal
Venue
BMJ Quality & Safety
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-07-07
Volume
21
Issue
10
Pages
843-849
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-5415
  • 2044-5423
OpenAlex
W2117406311
Cited by
147
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11
FWCI
15.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
Keywords
communication breakdown, information transmission, surgical care pathway, patient safety, multidisciplinary team, handover, work environment, surgical morbidity and mortality
MeSH terms
Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Interviews as Topic, Critical Pathways, Information Dissemination

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