EP 538 Improving the Handover System in Vascular Surgery
Clicks: 2
ID: 324082
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
2 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #422 of 432 articles by views in the british journal of surgery
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 432 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Aims A QIP aimed to replace a manually updated handover document in a Tertiary Vascular Surgery Department, with custom live patient lists within existing sub-utilised Electronic Patient Record (EPR). Aiming to reduce manual data entry, improve data confidence, team digital communication, and provide real-time visibility for all patient subclasses. Methods A mixed-methods baseline pilot was conducted. Quantitative data was gathered via a formal pre: n=5; 60% Registrars, 40% FY1s and post: n=7; 57% Registrars, 43% FY1s survey. Qualitative feedback was gathered Pre: 5/6 Consultants, 5/8 Registrars, 2/4 FY1s, and 1/4 CNS; Post: 6 Registrars, 2 FY1s. Custom EPR patient lists were designed, with standardised data input (itemised procedures/imaging, medications, PMH) and coded fields for Vascular-specific activity. Following transition consensus, instructions were deployed (written, 1:1 and group demonstration). Handover subsequently transitioned successfully and cost-neutrally from 0-100% EPR system to track patient activity. Results Pre and post survey: satisfaction 0% - 85.8% more-very satisfied. Identifying new patients: 80% difficulty – 85.8% easier (42.9 very, 42.9% easy). Accurate inpatient totals: 80% lack of confidence – 85.7% confident (71.4% extremely, 14.3% very). Determining list currency: 60% difficulty – 71.5% very-easy. Manual search of hospital number: 100% daily - 100% reduction (14.3% never). Patient care improvement: 0% disagreeing – 85.7% some-overall-positive impact found. Likert scales; improved: collaboration, standardisation and accessibility/tracking. Conclusions This project evidences the case of optimising EPR systems to improve patient care, with potential interventions at operational, scalability and human factor levels. Limitations included early deployment oversight, a small formal sample, ongoing technical configuration and post-intervention surveying.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7172515721
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Rahma Liibaan, Raghvinder Gambhir |
| Journal | the british journal of surgery |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/bjs/znag087.617
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.