Translating evidence‐based nursing clinical handover practice in an acute care setting: A quasi‐experimental study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective transfer of information during the nursing handover contributes to patient safety. This study aimed to translate the best practice nursing shift handover recommendations in an acute care setting using the Ottawa Model for Research Use and to explore its effect on patient adverse outcomes (falls, pressure injuries, and medication errors). Using a quasi-experimental design, the study was conducted in four internal medicine wards in a major tertiary hospital. A total of 88 nurses and 110 patients participated in 152 handover observations. The findings showed clinically important increases in percentages and odds of nurses' compliance with shift handover recommendations after the intervention. The patient adverse outcomes after the intervention were compared to the corresponding period of previous year. A reduction was observed for all adverse patient outcomes with incident rate ratios of 0.762 (p = 0.027) for falls, 0.624 for pressure injuries (p = 0.010), and 0.782 for medication errors (p = 0.023). Replicating this study's methodology across multiple clinical settings will increase the generalizability of findings and provide further evidence to inform nursing practice and policy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".