EP 538 Improving the Handover System in Vascular Surgery

Clicks: 23
ID: 324082
2026
Free PDF
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.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #206 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 minted

Create 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
Sign in to mint
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
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal the british journal of surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/bjs/znag087.617
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag087.617
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.