The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Evaluation of Structured Communication Tools in Healthcare
Abstract
Suboptimal communication between health professionals has been identified as a significant causative factor in incidents compromising patient safety. The use of a structured method of communication has been suggested to improve the quality of information exchange, particularly with inexperienced practitioners. One structure that has been suggested to improve communication is the situational briefing tool SBAR. This tool was developed by the US Navy for standardizing important and urgent communication in nuclear submarines. Despite its widespread uptake in some areas of healthcare, its effectiveness has until recently been unproven. This paper describes the benefits and pitfalls of methods we have used to prove the effectiveness of these communication tools.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
SBAR has been demonstrated to guide effective and efficient verbal and/or written communication regarding patients' conditions.
“An evidence-based tool, SBAR has been demonstrated to guide effective and efficient verbal and/or written communication regarding patients’ conditions (Marshall, Harrison, & Flanagan, 2008).”
From Using SBAR to Communicate with Policymakers (2018) · cites this paper as Marshall, Harrison, & Flanagan, 2008
The SBAR briefing tool was specifically developed to aid in sharing vital information in time-pressured scenarios.
“The SBAR briefing tool was specifically developed to aid in sharing vital information in time-pressured scenarios and demonstrates positive effects on communication’s flow and pace (Marshall, Harrison, and Flanagan, 2008).”
From Using SBAR to Communicate with Policymakers (2018) · cites this paper as Marshall, Harrison, and Flanagan, 2008
SBAR demonstrates positive effects on communication's flow and pace.
“The SBAR briefing tool was specifically developed to aid in sharing vital information in time-pressured scenarios and demonstrates positive effects on communication’s flow and pace (Marshall, Harrison, and Flanagan, 2008).”
From Using SBAR to Communicate with Policymakers (2018) · cites this paper as Marshall, Harrison, and Flanagan, 2008
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Cushing S., 1994, Fatal Words: Communication Clashes and Aircraft Crashes. In (pp. 7–50)
- Flanagan B., Harrison J. C., Marshall S. D. (2008). An Innovative Simulation-Based Program on Patient Safety for Final Year Medical Students. Paper presented at the 13th Ottawa International Conference on Clinical Competence. from www.ozzawa13.com
- 10.1016/S1553-7250(06)32022-3 · DOI
- Heinze A., 2004, Reflections on the Use of Blended Learning. Education in a Changing Environment
- Hogan J. (2007). What Skills are Required to Facilitate a Simulation Session in the “Pause and Discuss Mode”. Unpublished Master's Thesis.
- 10.1093/intqhc/mzh026 · DOI
- Rosengarten P., 2005, Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Disciplinary journal, 6, 24
- Sanderson P. M., Watson M. O., Jenkins S., Liu D., Russell W. J., Green N., et al. (2007). Summative Evaluation with a full-scale patient simulator: Challenges and adaptations. Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 51st Annual Meeting, Baltimore. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using SBAR to Communicate with Policymakers
Jurns, C. (2018) · OJIN The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing · doi:10.3912/ojin.vol24no01ppt47 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Marshall, S., Harrison, J., & Flanagan, B.
- Affiliations
- Monash University (AU)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 860-864
- ISSN
- 0163-5182 (ISSN-L)
- 1071-1813
- 2169-5067
- OpenAlex
- W2328207664
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- SBAR, structured communication, interprofessional communication, patient safety, communication tools, effectiveness evaluation, information sharing
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
