Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42574924

Assessment and CommuniCation ExcelLEnce foR sAfe paTient outcomEs (ACCELERATE): A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial evaluating the effectiveness of a nurse-led assessment and handover communication intervention on patient adverse events.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients continue to experience harm from undetected deterioration, falls and pressure injuries. We aimed to implement and evaluate an organisational, ward-level nurse-led assessment and communication intervention to proactively reduce patient adverse events. METHODS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised Trial over 12-months was conducted at three metropolitan hospitals. Our intervention comprised a comprehensive, systematic patient assessment at shift commencement; a structured patient-centred bedside nurse-to-nurse clinical handover; and multidisciplinary communication consisting of nurse participation in medical ward rounds. Evidence-based implementation strategies informed intervention delivery to nine clusters (20-35 bed-wards with &#x2265;70% permanent nurses) over three sequential 14-week steps. Routinely collected patient-level data were used to measure intervention effect. The primary outcome was a composite measure of medical emergency team calls, unplanned intensive care unit admissions, in-hospital falls; and stage 2-4 pressure injuries. Secondary outcomes were: individual measures of the primary outcome; nurse-reported perceptions of safety culture; organisational readiness to change; barriers to physical assessment; staff engagement; and patient-reported experience measures of safety and overall hospital experience. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, hospital, pre/post intervention, and Trial step (fortnight), with random effects for ward and patient. RESULTS: There were 13,753 eligible admissions. No change was observed in the primary composite outcome measure (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.99 [0.77, 1.28]; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.95). There was no significant difference in medical emergency team calls (OR [95% CI]: 1.02 [0.75, 1.39]; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.91); unplanned intensive care unit admissions (OR [95% CI]: 1.35 [0.57, 3.20]; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.50) and falls (OR [95% CI]: 1.53 [0.96, 2.45]; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.07). However, stage 2-4 pressure injuries significantly decreased by 41% (OR [95% CI]: 0.59 [0.38, 0.93]; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.02); a significant absolute effect improvement of 0.8% ([95% CI: 0.3%-1.3%], p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.01). There were statistically significant improvements in nurses' overall perceptions of Safety Attitudes (Pre: 74.6, Post: 79.7; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.02), and the Organisational Readiness to Change subscales of, leader culture (Pre: 3.73, Post 3.91; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.02), leadership behaviour (Pre: 3.85, Post: 4.11; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.03), and general resources (Pre: 3.06, Post: 3.30; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.03). A statistically significant decrease in Barriers to Physical Assessment (Pre: 2.48, Post: 2.24; p&#xa0;<0.001) and in six of seven sub-scales was observed. Patients' overall Measure of Safety remained high, but unchanged (Pre: 3.94 Post: 3.92; p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.07). CONCLUSION: The ACCELERATE Trial demonstrated that nurse-driven initiatives, emphasising structured physical assessments by nurses, patient-centred clinical handovers, and multidisciplinary communication, significantly: reduced pressure injuries; decreased nurses' perceived barriers to performing physical assessments; and improved leadership behaviour, communication, and ward safety culture perceptions. Results highlight the transformative potential of this approach, which now warrants testing at scale for broader implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ID: ACTRN12621000265875.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

John Rihari-Thomas, Susan Whittam, Anna Thornton, Liza Goncharov, Diana Slade, Jake McMahon, Alysia Coventry, Kelly Coughlan, Yvonne Steadward, Joanne Taylor, Mark Liu, Sarah Walsh, Kathryn Riddell, Karen Tuqiri, Kim Olesen, Maria R Dahm, Laura Chien, Patrick Kelly, Jean Ball, Elizabeth McInnes, Sandy Middleton. 2026-07-28. Assessment and CommuniCation ExcelLEnce foR sAfe paTient outcomEs (ACCELERATE): A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial evaluating the effectiveness of a nurse-led assessment and handover communication intervention on patient adverse events.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2026.105652

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Diagnostic communication in functional neurological disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient acceptance and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic disclosure is a key therapeutic moment in Functional Neurological Disorder (FND). This systematic review aimed to evaluate quantitative evidence on diagnostic acceptance, understanding, satisfaction, symptom outcomes, and healthcare utilisation following diagnostic disclosure in FND, and to conduct a meta-analysis of diagnostic acceptance. METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science identified quantitative studies in adults with FND. Screening followed predefined inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a structured template and risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using the Freeman-Tukey transformation. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, four of which contributed to the meta-analysis (n&#x202f;=&#x202f;481). Reported diagnostic acceptance rates ranged from 38.7% to 90%, although the timing and method of assessment varied across studies. Pooled acceptance was 0.68 (95% CI 0.44-0.88), with substantial heterogeneity. Structured or reinforced communication was frequently associated with improved understanding and satisfaction, although its superiority for diagnostic acceptance was not established. In some studies, diagnostic acceptance was associated with more favourable clinical outcomes, although findings were inconsistent. Some studies reported reductions in healthcare utilisation or costs following satisfactory diagnostic explanation, whereas others found no sustained overall reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic communication in FND is associated with differences in acceptance, understanding, and downstream clinical and healthcare outcomes. Approximately two-thirds of patients were reported as accepting the diagnosis following disclosure, although the timing and method of assessment varied substantially across studies. Empathic and evidence-informed communication may enhance understanding and engagement, although its effects on healthcare use and recovery remain uncertain. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Diagnostic disclosure should be delivered clearly, empathically, and with reinforcement over time. Written information, reputable educational resources, and opportunities for follow-up clarification may support patient understanding and engagement, although stronger comparative evidence is needed.

Humans

The influence of organizational culture on medication safety practices and associated risk factors in the community setting: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Increasing attention has been given to the role of organizational culture in influencing medication safety practices across healthcare settings. The lack of widely accepted standardized instrumentation makes operational measurement of organizational culture and medication safety challenging. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the impact of organizational culture on medication safety within community healthcare settings. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Nursing & Allied Health were searched in August 2025 using keywords, subject terms, field codes, and Boolean operators to identify papers relevant to the review question; bibliographies of included studies were also reviewed. Screening and full-text review were completed independently by two reviewers with a third to adjudicate conflicts. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme was used for quality assessment. The PRISMA statement guided the development and implementation of the review. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were included representing various community settings. Most studies reported on untoward medication events, but few measured systematically collected safety data before and after an intervention. Organizational culture was seldom defined or operationalized. Most studies were methodologically sound, but the overall level of evidence was weak to moderate. CONCLUSION: Organizational culture influences medication safety through aspects such as communication channels, teamwork, training, and an environment that allows error and near-miss reporting. Few studies explicitly evaluate the causal impact of culture interventions on measurable medication safety outcomes in community healthcare settings. Further research should incorporate standardized measurement tools and intervention-based, pre-post designs to better understand how organizational culture influences medication safety in community healthcare settings.

Organizational Culture

Patient and hospital factors associated with disparities in acute stroke treatment in community and academic hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Systemic barriers may affect identification, emergency transportation (EMS), and care coordination for people with stroke. We assessed patient- and hospital-level factors for associations with pre-hospital and emergency department care. We compared trends for patients presenting to an academic medical center (AMC) versus community hospitals (CHs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at an AMC (Tufts Medical Center) with 542 patients aged &#x2265;18&#xa0;years hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack between 1/1/2018-12/31/2020 who presented directly to AMC or presented to AMC as a transfer from initial contact CHs. Primary outcomes were EMS use, stroke code activation, door-to-CT time, and door-to-needle time. RESULTS: AMC patients identifying as non-Hispanic Asian (odds ratio (OR)&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.25; 95% confidence interval (CI)&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.13-0.47) and Hispanic (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.19; 95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.05-0.72) and CH non-Hispanic Black/African-American patients (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.17; 95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.05-0.62) were less likely to use EMS compared to non-Hispanic white patients. Patients with non-English primary language were less likely to use EMS (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.38; 95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.23-0.63) compared to English-speaking patients in both hospital settings. CH Hispanic patients were less likely to have stroke code activation (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.24; 95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.05-0.86) compared to non-Hispanic white patients. CH patients were less likely to have stroke code activation (OR&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.12; 95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.07-0.19), had 31% shorter door-to-CT time (95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;15-43% shorter), and had 29% longer door-to-needle time (95% CI&#xa0;=&#xa0;5-58% longer). CONCLUSION: Patient-level factors and hospital setting were associated with differences in acute care suggesting opportunities for community outreach on EMS use, interventions to alleviate language barriers, and a need to address systemic biases.

Humans