Articles Open access

Validazione linguistico culturale di un questionario per valutare l’uso della tecnica SBAR nel setting ospedaliero

Authors

Published
22 October 2020
Section
Articles
DOI
10.4081/scenario.2020.439
Pages
13-18

Abstract

La tecnica SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation) e i suoi derivati ISBAR (Identify, Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation), SBAR-R (Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation-Review/Response) ISBARR (Identify, Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation and Repeat) e ISOBAR (Identify, Situation, Observations, Background, Agreedplan, Read back) rappresentano tecniche di comunicazione interprofessionale e intraprofessionale strutturate. La valutazione dell’uso della tecnica SBAR in ospedale potrebbe essere utile per monitorare il suo impatto sulla sicurezza e sugli esiti dei pazienti. Per quanto ne sappiamo, ad oggi, nessuno strumento in lingua italiana per la valutazione dell’uso della tecnica SBAR in ambito ospedaliero è stato riportato in letteratura.

Supporting Agencies

References

  1. Aspden P, Corrigan JM, Wolcott J. & Erickson SM Patient safety: achieving a new standard for care. 2005 Washington, DC (US) : National Academies Press.
  2. World Health Organisation. Conceptual Framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety (2009). (Data di accesso 17 aprile 2020) da http://www. who. int/ patientsafety/ taxonomy/ icps_ full_ report. pdf.
  3. Brennan TA, Leape L, Laird NM, Hebert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Newhouse JP, Weiler PC & Hiatt HH. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I . NEJM 1991; 324,370–6.
  4. The Joint Commission. Sentinel event data: root causes by event type 2004–2014.(2014 ). (Data di accesso 17 aprile 2020) da http ://www. tsigconsulting. com/ tolcam/ wp- content/ uploads/ 2015/ 04/ TJC- Sentinel- Event- Root_ Causes_ by_ Event_ Type_ 2004- 2014. pdf).
  5. Reader TW, Flin R, Mearns K. & Cuthbertson B H. Interdisciplinary communication in the intensive care unit. BJA 2007; 98, 347–52.
  6. Burley D. Better communication in the emergency department. Emergency Nurse 2011; 19, 32–36.
  7. Dayton E & Henriksen K. Communication failure: basic components, contributing factors, and the call for structure. Jt Comm J Qual a Saf ; 2007; 33,34–47.
  8. Nadzam DM. Nurses' role in communication and patient safety. JNCQ 2009; 24,184–188.
  9. Doucette J. View from the cockpit: what the aviation industry can teach us about patient safety. Nursing 2006; 36 (11), 50–53.
  10. von Dossow V & Zwissler B. (2016). Recommendations of the German Association of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) on structured patient handover in the perioperative setting: the SBAR concept. Anaesthesist 2016; 65 (Suppl 1), 1–4.
  11. Woodhall LJ, Vertacnik L & McLaughlin M. Implementation of the SBAR communication technique in a tertiary center. J Emerg Nurs 2008; 34, 314–317.
  12. Lee SY, Dong L, Lim YH, Poh CH & Lim WS. SBAR: towards a common interprofessional team-based communication tool. Med Educ 2016; 50, 1167–1168.
  13. Riesenberg LA, Leitzsch J & Little BW. Systematic review of handoff mnemonics literature. Am J Med Qual 2009; 24,196–204.
  14. Dunsford J. Structured communication: improving patient safety with SBAR. Nurs Womens Health 2009; 13,384–90.
  15. Guise JM & Lowe NK. Do you speak SBAR?. JOGNN 2006; 35, 313–314.
  16. Powell SK. SBAR—it's not just another communication tool. Prof Case Manag 2007; 12,195–196.
  17. Donahue M, Miller M, Smith L, Dykes P& Fitzpatrick JJ. A leadership initiative to improve communication and enhance safety. Am J Med Qual 2011; 26, 206–211.
  18. Landau S& Wellman LG. Small changes can streamline the handoff process in a staff-driven process improvement project. JOGNN 2014; 43 (Suppl 1), S49.
  19. Wathen B, Roth J & Dobyns E. Crit Care Med 2013; , 41(12 Suppl 1):A167.
  20. McCrory M., Aboumatar H & Hunt E. (2011). Communication during pediatric rapid response events: a survey of healthcare providers. Crit Care Med 2011; 39, 176.
  21. Raymond M. & Harrison MC. The structured communication tool SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation) improves communication in neonatology. SAMJ 2014; ,104, 850–852.
  22. Renz SM, Boltz MP, Wagner LM, Capezuti EA & Lawrence TE. Examining the feasibility and utility of an SBAR protocol in long-term care. Geriatr Nurs 2013; 34, 295–301.
  23. Renz SM, Boltz M., Capezuti E & Wagner LM. Implementing an SBAR communication protocol: a quality improvement project. Ann Long-term Care 2015; 23, 27–31.
  24. Beckett CD & Kipnis G. Collaborative communication: integrating SBAR to improve quality/patient safety outcomes. J Healthc Qual 2009; 31,19–28.
  25. Velji K, Baker GR, Fancott C, Andreoli A, Boaro N, Tardi, G, Aimone E & Sinclair L. Effectiveness of an Adapted SBAR Communication Tool for a Rehabilitation Setting. Healthcare Quarterly 2008; 11(Special Issue), 72–79.
  26. Mitchell C & Johnston D. Fast bleep audit to determine the appropriateness of fast bleeps received and the quality of communication relayed. Anaesthesia 2014; 69, 4.
  27. Panesar RS, Albert B, Messina C& Parker M. The effect of an electronic SBAR communication tool on documentation of acute events in the pediatric intensive care unit. Am J Med Qual 2016; 31,64–68.
  28. Randmaa M, Mårtensson G, Leo Swenne C & Engström M. SBAR improves communication and safety climate and decreases incident reports due to communication errors in an anaesthetic clinic: a prospective intervention study. BMJ Open 2014; 21, 4 (1).
  29. Zhu H, McCrea N & Kelsall W. Improving the paediatric handover: quality, safety and SBAR. Arch Dis Child 2014; 99, A82.
  30. Cornell P, Gervis MT, Yates L & Vardaman JM. Impact of SBAR on nurse shift reports and staff rounding. Medsurg Nurs; 23, 334–342.
  31. Joint commission international (2017) .“Gli standard Joint Commission International per l’accreditamento degli ospedali†46° Edizione –Joint Commission International
  32. Trentham B, Andreoli A, Boaro N, Velji K & Fancott C. SBAR: A shared structure for effective team communication. An implementation toolkit. (2010). 2nd Edition. Toronto Rehabilitation Institute: Toronto.
  33. Andreoli A, Fancott C, Velj, K, Bake, GR, Solway S, Aimone E &TardifG. Using SBAR to Communicate Falls Risk and Management in Interprofessional Rehabilitation Teams. Healthcare Quarterly 2010; 13 (Special Issue): 92-100.
  34. Boaro N, Fancott C Baker GR, Velji K & Andreoli A. Using SBAR to Improve Communication in Interprofessional Teams. J of Interprof Care 2010; 24 (10), 111–114.
  35. World Health Organization (2015). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments, (Data di accesso 17 aprile 2020) da http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en.
  36. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F & Ferraz MB Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine 2000; 15, (25), 3186-3191.
  37. Reeder G. Take a "sticky" note on brainstorming. Nurs Manag 2017; 48 (1),32-37. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000497012.97556.c2
  38. Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, & Bondas T Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci 2013;, 15, 398-405. doi:10.1111/nhs.12048.
  39. Lynn MR. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res 1986; 35 (6), 382-386.
  40. Polit DF & Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2006; 29,489-497.
  41. Sperber AD, De Vellis RF & Boehlecke B. Cross-cultural translation: methodology and validation. J Cross Cult Psychol 1994; 25,501-524.
  42. Sperber AD. Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research. Gastroenterology 2004; 126, (1 Suppl ), 124-128
  43. Hyrk K. Validating an instrument for clinical supervision using an expert panel. Int J Nurs Stud 2003; 40, 619–625

Metrics

Citations and online attention from Dimensions, Altmetric and PlumX.

PlumX Metrics

License

Aniarti has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.