What does the SBAR approach to patient safety encourage?

SBAR improves communication and safety climate and decreases incident reports due to communication errors in an anaesthetic clinic: a prospective intervention study

1. Maria Randmaa1,2,3,
2. Gunilla Mårtensson1,3,
3. Christine Leo Swenne3,
4. Maria Engström1,3

1. 1Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden
2. 2Department of Anaesthesia, County Council of Gävleborg, Sweden
3. 3Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

1. Correspondence to Maria Randmaa; maaraa{at}hig.se

Abstract

Objectives We aimed to examine staff members’ perceptions of communication within and between different professions, safety attitudes and psychological empowerment, prior to and after implementation of the communication tool Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation [SBAR] at an anaesthetic clinic. The aim was also to study whether there was any change in the proportion of incident reports caused by communication errors.

Design A prospective intervention study with comparison group using preassessments and postassessments. Questionnaire data were collected from staff in an intervention [n=100] and a comparison group [n=69] at the anaesthetic clinic in two hospitals prior to [2011] and after [2012] implementation of SBAR. The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors was calculated during a 1-year period prior to and after implementation.

Setting Anaesthetic clinics at two hospitals in Sweden.

Participants All licensed practical nurses, registered nurses and physicians working in the operating theatres, intensive care units and postanaesthesia care units at anaesthetic clinics in two hospitals were invited to participate.

Intervention Implementation of SBAR in an anaesthetic clinic.

Primary and secondary outcomes The primary outcomes were staff members’ perception of communication within and between different professions, as well as their perceptions of safety attitudes. Secondary outcomes were psychological empowerment and incident reports due to error of communication.

Results In the intervention group, there were statistically significant improvements in the factors ‘Between-group communication accuracy’ [p=0.039] and ‘Safety climate’ [p=0.011]. The proportion of incident reports due to communication errors decreased significantly [p