Clinical Handover

Clinical handover is the natural event which is communicative. It is a vital section in trying to get every aspect of a patient correct during treatment. It can be achieved and only achieved through a linguistic exchange with an individual, mostly clinicians who will be talking and doing a lot of writing to each other. Most of the handover is in inappropriate ways. The only way to make it be to standard an introduction of the “ISBAR” framework which acts as a guide to all the rules to be at a keen follow up. (Anderson et.al, 2015). The structure gives clinical personnel the approach they are to use in the verge of handover, the capacity to be able to adapt to the environment and implement a viable evaluation to the approach to have the clinical communication an actual interface. (Abraham et.al, 2012). The communication around handover in clinics and healthcare units should have excellent communication. The report is going to have an analysis of all the process to be at hand while trying to make handover communications. The framework ensures the completeness of the information in reliance to be fully complete and help to reduce the likelihood of missing out data.

An adequate handover attribution has several implications but among the necessary attributes will include, face to face communication which will involve two or more individuals. The other implication is that there should be sufficient time for the communication to be efficient. (Ahmed et.al, 2012). A common language should be in use rather a diverse language should not be in use for it may cause a misunderstanding and hence language barrier.  Checklists and forms will be an excellent means to make the reference from like the name of the patient and others. Thus it is an essential need for the handover. (Anumakonda et.al, 2011). A narrative should be understandable and the representation too. The videos have two different essences of communication, and both are to be in the discussion to be able to find out the best methods The first video is the right aspect of handover and the second one is a bad example on how to handover. The first video is Bedside Handover Austin Health Austin Health and the second video is Nursing – an example of poor handover Linzi Donaldson Linzi Donaldson.

In the first step in getting into the patient’s room, the first video, the first nurse, and the second nurse enter the patient’s rooms, and they greet the patient, which is remarkable. The next step taken by them is that the nurse introduces and that makes a clear and good impression to the patient. She later states her purpose to be in that room which is a good way to bedside handover according to the ISBAR framework. (Abraham et.al, 2012). In the second video, a contrast of that is from experience, and that is, the two nurses enter the patient room without knocking and do not bother introducing themselves to the patient and the purpose of the visitation to the care room. They bellow, and that mistakenly makes the nurse available not hear the plea of the patient, it takes a nurse who comes from a different part to save the situation.

The first nurse in the first video positions herself in a way such that she can face the two individuals that are the patient and the fellow nurse. The first step taken is the level of identification of the patient; it is amidst a cheerful smile which allows for a good room for the patient to build trust to the nurses. (Australian Commission 2011). The next step taken is that the nurse asks for the patient’s consent and with this, she asks her the name with she might call her It creates an excellent forum for the psychological buildup of the next step by the next nurse. In the second video it not available a stage of the positioning rather the positioning is poor as they sit giving the patient the back and that does not create a good impression for the patients does not know the next step. (Ahmed et.al, 2012). According to the ISBA framework, the flow of information should be in a good state to facilitate communication.

In the aspect of information sharing in the first video the first nurse includes the patient in the conversation, the patient is in acknowledgment, and that opens a way to feel free. A clarification is, and this is the history which is done together with the patient. (Queensland health, 2013). The victim’s name is in use by the first nurse it makes the patient be not in neglect. In the second video, the patient is not in involvement and this interfere with the flow of information for the patient will not be familiar to the next nurse for they do not know their history.

In the last step of completing the communication and transfer, the nurse in the first video takes the opportunity and provides the patient with room to ask the question, this clears all doubts in place and thus will allow a wholesome new adventure in the way of communication in the nursing care. (Aese et.al, 2012). The allowance of the patient to have to know the specific dates the nurse care personnel is going to come back and this occurs in the first video. In the second video, there is no trace of any information given to the patient. 

In conclusion, all the systematic framework of ISBAR should be in a full implementation to have a full realization of effective communication to the nursing care homes and units. (Agency for health care, 2010). Involving the patient helps to create a good room for the patient to know what is transpiring in the chamber thus a right place to make a question and argument if possible. ISBAR framework is the ultimate solution to communication in nursing homes.

Abraham, J., Kannampallil, T.G. and Patel, V.L. (2012). Bridging gaps in handoffs: A

continuity of care based approach. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 45, pp. 240-254.

Anderson, J., Malone, L., Shanahan, K., & Manning, J. (2015). Nursing bedside clinical

handover–an integrated review of issues and tools.Journal of clinical nursing, 24(5-6), 662-671

Abraham, J., Kannampallil, T. and Patel, V.L. (2014). A systematic review of the literature

on the evaluation of handoff tools: implications for research and practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 21(1), pp. 154-162.

Ahmed, J., Mehmood, S., Rehman, S., Ilyas, C. and Khan, L.U.R. (2012). Impact of a

structured template and staff training on compliance and quality of clinical handover. International Journal of Surgery, 10, pp. 571-574.

Anumakonda, V., Doijode, S. and Bhaskaran, S. (2011). A prospective audit of

multidisciplinary handover (MDHO) of responsibility for patients in the post anaesthetic care unit in a district general hospital (DGH): Patient safety perceptive. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 28, pp. 215.

Henderson, A. J., & Schoonbeek, S. (2015). Commentary on ‘Developing a framework for

nursing handover in the emergency department: an individualised and systematic approach’by Klim et al. Journal of clinical nursing, 24(3-4), 608-609.

Aase, K., Søyland, E. and Hansen, B.S. (2011). A standardized patient handover process:

Perceptions and functioning. Safety Science Monito, 15(2), pp.1-9.

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) (2013). Nurse Bedside Shift Report

Implementation Handbook. Maryland, AHRQ. 

Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare (2014). National Clinical

HandoverInitiative.Availableat: https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/ourwork/clinical-communications/clinical-handover/national-clinical-handover-initiative-pilotprogram Accessed 24/08/2016.

Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care – Clinical Handover. ACSQHC,

2012.www.safetyandquality.gov.au/ourwork/clinicalcommunications/clinicalhandover.com  accessed 24/08/2016.

Queensland Health, Patient Safety Unit (2013). Clinical Handover at the Bedside Checklist.

Queensland,QueenslandHealth.Availableat: https://www.health.qld.gov.au/psq/handover/docs/ch-checklist.pdf.com

Accessed 24/08/2016.