No abstract

Background and purpose: Patient handoffs have long been identified as a potentially challenging time for patients because poor communication produces numerous complications. This is especially true with regards to patient care handoffs between areas such as the emergency department (ED) and inpatient setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze existing literature pertaining to standardized handoffs between the ED and inpatient setting and its effect on perceived patient safety to guide future research, clinical practice, and patient safety. Methods: A review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were selected using predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria: primary research and patient handoff from the ED to the inpatient setting. Quality assessment of the studies was completed using The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Conclusion: Existing studies demonstrate the potential for increased perception of patient safety as well as provider satisfaction when appropriate staff education and standardized handoff tools are implemented. There is a lack of data on the standardization of handoff tools between the ED and inpatient setting and their impact on perceived patient safety. Implications for practice: The combination of provider education and implementation of standardized handoff tools in the ED positively affects perceptions of patient safety and provider satisfaction. Hospital administrations should strongly consider incorporating standardized handoff tools into practice.

Purpose Psychological distress is common in patients with cancer and is associated with lower quality-of-life (QOL). Although distress among oncology outpatients undergoing standard therapy has been widely studied, few studies have evaluated distress among patients enrolling on Phase I therapeutic clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to characterize levels of distress and types of stressors in patients enrolling on Phase I clinical trials. Methods Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCN DT) and Problem list and measures of anxiety and depression at the time of Phase I clinical trial initiation. Results We enrolled 87 patients (95% with metastatic/incurable disease) who were initiating a Phase I clinical trial. Analyses revealed a high prevalence of distress (51%) and anxiety (28%). There were significant correlations between overall distress and practical problems ( r = 0.31, p = 0.016), family problems ( r = 0.35, p = 0.006), and emotional problems ( r = 0.64, p < 0.001), but not physical problems ( r = 0.17, p = 0.206). Conclusions Patients may be better prepared to manage physical stressors but not practical, emotional, or family stressors at the time of Phase I trial enrollment. Implications for Cancer Survivors Phase I trial patients experience high levels of distress which may be due to the rigors of previous therapies therapy and related emotional and social stressors related to the poor prognosis of their advanced cancer diagnosis. Distress may go unidentified without screening which is not standard practice at the time of Phase I trial consideration. Future studies should evaluate strategies to routinely identify and intervene upon addressable stressors in patients participating in Phase I clinical trials.

Premature return to play (RTP) following sports-related concussion (SRC) is associated with significant morbidity including risk of neurological and non-neurological injury, persistent post-concussion symptoms and chronic neurological deficits. Assessing athletes for RTP is critical but these decisions are currently based on clinical assessments that are subject to bias and symptomatic reporting that rely on compliance. An objective and easily obtained biomarker that can indicate recovery following SRC would aid clinicians to make safer RTP decisions. We performed a systematic review to identify potential biomarkers from saliva, urine and blood sources that could inform the clinical RTP decision. The MEDLINE database was searched. Inclusion criteria were studies focusing on adults diagnosed with SRC, fluid biomarkers from blood, saliva or urine and clinical recovery from SRC or at RTP. We assessed each biomarker for their time course post SRC and relationship to clinical recovery. Secondary outcomes included correlation with symptom scores and predictive value for prolonged RTP. We identified 8 studies all investigating blood-based markers of diffuse axonal injury (tau, NFL, SNTF), neuroglial injury (NSE, VLP-1, UCH-L1, S100B, GFAP), inflammation and hormonal disturbances. Tau, SNTF, UCH-1, GFAP, S100B and the inflammatory cytokine MCP-4 are raised post SRC and return to baseline by RTP. Changes in tau, NFL, SNTF, GFAP and MCP-4 post SRC correlate with severity of concussion as measured by symptom severity or RTP duration. There is only preliminary case-reporting for hormonal biomarkers. The evidence is limited by a lack of highly powered studies, variation in use of athletic and Contact sport controls (CSC) and a lack of consistent sampling and assessment protocols. There is promise for biomarkers to aid RTP decisions following SRC, most notably in use alongside clinical assessment in RTP criteria to allow greater precision in identifying mild and severe concussion.

No abstract