Exam Questions Updated On :
LOT-986 exam Dumps Source : Creating IBM Lotus Notes and Domino 8.5(R) Applications with Xpages and Advanced Techniques
Test Code : LOT-986
Test denomination : Creating IBM Lotus Notes and Domino 8.5(R) Applications with Xpages and Advanced Techniques
Vendor denomination : IBM
: 164 actual Questions
right source to derive LOT-986 modern-day brain sell cutting-edgef paper.
Going through killexams.com has become a habit when exam LOT-986 comes. And with exams coming up in just about 6 days was getting more important. But with topics I exigency some reference usher to travel once in a while so that I would derive better help. Thanks to killexams.com their that made it bar nothing facile to derive the topics inside your head easily which would otherwise would live impossible. And it is bar nothing because of killexams.com products that I managed to score 980 in my exam. Thats the highest score in my class.
No source is greater proper than this LOT-986 source.
I prepared LOT-986 with the assist of killexams.com and establish that they occupy pretty well-behaved stuff. I will travel for other IBM exams as well.
Take gain brand fresh LOT-986 dumps, disburse those questions to build sure your success.
I was a lot slothful and didnt exigency to technique work tough and continuously searched quick cuts and accessible techniques. At the same time as i used to live doing an IT course LOT-986 and it become very difficult for me and didnt able to learn any manual line then i heard about the internet web page which occupy been very celebrated within the market. I got it and my troubles eliminated in few days as soon as I started out it. The sample and exercise questions helped me hundreds in my prep of LOT-986 exams and that i correctly secured suitable marks as nicely. That modified into truely because of the killexams.
Get these s and travel to vacations to prepare.
Mysteriously I answerered bar nothing questions in this exam. An terrible lot obliged killexams.com its far a terrific asset for passing test. I counsel bar nothing of us to in reality disburse killexams.com. I test numerous books however disregarded to derive it. Anyways in the wake of using killexams.com Questions & solutions, i discovered the prerogative away forwardness in making plans questions and answers for the LOT-986 exam. I saw bar nothing of the troubles nicely.
can i learn dumps questions of LOT-986 exam?
Presently i bought your certification bundle and studied it very well. Final week I passed the LOT-986 and purchased my certification. killexams.com on-line exam simulator occupy become a wonderful device to prepare the exam. That extra my self assurance and i effortlessly passed the certification exam! Quite encouraged!!! As I had most efficacious one week left for exam LOT-986, I frantically searched for a few unique contents and stopped at killexams.com . It terminate up formed with brief question-solutions that had been antiseptic to apprehend. Inside one week, I dissect as many questions as possible. In the exam, it grow to live antiseptic for me to govern eighty 3% making 50/60 accurate answers in due time. killexams.com changed into an distinguished solution for me. Thanks.
Unbelieveable! but undoubted source modern-day LOT-986 actual test questions.
I used this package for my LOT-986 exam, too and passed it with top marks. I depended on killexams.com, and it changed into the prerogative choice to make. They gain up with actual LOT-986 exam questions and solutions actually the pass you will observe them at the exam. Accurate LOT-986 dumps arent to live had everywhere. Dont depend upon lax dumps. The dumps they provided are updated bar nothing the time, so I had the ultra-contemporary statistics and turned into able to skip effects. Exquisite exam education
No cheaper source trendy LOT-986 observed however.
I spent enough time studying these materials and passed the LOT-986 exam. The stuff is good, and whilst those are braindumps, import these material are constructed at the actual exam stuff, I dont grasp folks who try to bitch aboutthe LOT-986 questions being exceptional. In my case, now not bar nothing questions were one hundred% the equal, but the topics and widespread approach had been surely accurate. So, buddies, if you test tough sufficient youll result just fine.
i establish a superb source modern-day LOT-986 fabric.
Its concise solutions helped me to discharge well-behaved marks noting bar nothing questions below the stipulated time in LOT-986. Being an IT grasp, my competencies with esteem are so forth exigency to live suitable. Not withstanding, proceeding with a customary employment with giant responsibilities, it became not facile for me to bewitch a solid making plans. At that factor, I establish out about the typically organized question and reply aide of killexams.com dumps.
LOT-986 certification exam is quite irritating without this study guide.
This is the best test-prep on the market! I just took and passed my LOT-986. Only one question was unseen in the exam. The information that comes with the QA build this product far more than a brain-dump, for coupled with traditional studies; online exam simulator is an extremely valuable tool in advancing ones career.
Are there actual sources for LOT-986 explore at publications?
I handed, and clearly extraordinarily completely satisfied to document that killexams.com adhere to the claims they make. They provide actual exam questions and the finding out engine works flawlessly. The bundle includes the whole thing they promise, and their customer advocate works well (I had to derive in handle with them for the motive that first my online rate would not travel through, but it turned out to live my fault). Anyhow, this is a bizarre product, masses higher than I had predicted. I handed LOT-986 exam with nearly top marks, something I in no pass concept i was able to. Thank you.
The subsequent time you convene an 800 number with a gripe about a product or service, account this: notwithstanding it’s a dependable are animated adult who answers, she or he could not live the one determining how to deal with you. in its place, a posh collection of algorithms might besides step in, to gauge your temper and react therefore. One version of IBM’s interactive expertise Watson coadjutant instantly analyzes your tone of voice. Then, based on precisely how peeved you sound, the device suggests what the carrier rep should present as a repair for whatever your issue is—money back, as an example, or free transport in your next order—with the purpose of keeping on to your business.
wondering why a human CSR can’t simply tackle this dialog? “people interpret tones of voice in another way, so that they reply in a different pass to shoppers,” explains IBM advisor Aman Kochhar. against this, he provides, “A.I. isn't subjective. So it’s a distinguished deal greater constant.”
Kochhar has been getting to know to supervene synthetic intelligence to enterprise problems on the grounds that terminal December, when he begun taking A.I. lessons as fragment of the first fragment of a huge fresh training propel inside IBM. referred to as AI talents Academy (AISA), the software is designed to result two things. First, it teaches employees about integrating A.I. into their personal jobs within the company, from creating marketing apps to improving deliver chain efficiency. on the same time, AISA educates IBMers in consulting, income, operations, and in other places a pass to collaborate with shoppers to disburse A.I. of their organizations, too. Divided into two tracks—one for techies (application developers, engineers, research scientists) and one for everybody else—the curriculum has four ranges, from basic to skilled.
greater than 2,200 IBM staffers occupy started the practising due to the fact it launched remaining year, and IBM expects at the least 4,000 graduates of bar nothing four degrees in 2019. however, says IBM vice president for skill Obed Louissant, that’s only for openers: “All of their employees will ultimately live knowledgeable in A.I.” additionally, AISA always adds fresh content. within the works at this time: fresh classes on making disburse of A.I. in mission management and commonplace management roles.
in one experience, it’s simplest logical that IBM is investing mountainous chunks of its $500 million annual training charge sweep in AISA. after all, “we build these A.I. technologies,” notes Louissant. “So they now occupy a accountability to discipline individuals the pass to disburse them, both internal and out of doors the company.”
ok, however AISA additionally obviously does whatever else — to wit, it makes IBM’s 350,000 employees global much more desirable to different employers. As more corporations depend extra heavily on statistics analytics, and extra jobs claim a working expertise of A.I., Gartner predicts 2.three million fresh roles global that allows you to require these competencies by pass of the conclusion of next yr.
For IBM, AISA is a calculated chance. On the one hand, the enterprise has no precise option however to educate its staff in A.I. however even so, assisting personnel boost precisely the expertise most well-liked in the outside world at the jiffy looks dicey. “We did believe a distinguished deal about this as they developed the software,” Louissant says, adding wryly, “We occupy been involved from the outset about even if we’d live creating a public carrier.”
it might probably determine that approach, but for now, Louissant thinks most graduates of IBM’s program will want to stick round. He elements to the proven fact that, among the many roughly 800 americans who occupy already completed AISA working towards—and who are for this intuition much more marketable than they were a 12 months in the past—attrition, thus far, is reduce than for IBM’s staff universal.
It’s early days yet, of route, but that tiny attrition cost may live a reflection of what employees pointed out, in designated surveys, about what motivates and engages them. much more than money, which of direction opponents can proffer too, IBMers hiss they’re “most interested in keeping up with the innovative in technology and consistently gaining learning of fresh competencies,” says Louissant. “So providing them fresh practising is a retention method.” in this epoch of persistent (and, it seems, multiplying) skills gaps, that’s a notion value wondering.
Anne Fisher is a career skilled and tips columnist who writes “Work It Out,” Fortune’s usher to working and animated within the 21st century. each week, she’ll reply your most challenging profession questions. occupy one? seek information from her on Twitter or electronic mail her at email@example.com.
IBM sells its marketing and commerce utility systems to Centerbridge companions, a private equity company. IBM CEO Ginni Rometty continues to dump ageing assets.
IBM has sold its advertising and commerce application platforms to Centerbridge partners, a personal equity firm. The deal continues IBM CEO Ginni Rometty’s approach to sell off growing worn traffic lines while making an attempt to pivot extra impulsively towards cloud, safety, cognitive computing and different increase markets. fiscal terms of the deal had been no longer disclosed.
The sale contains the following IBM advertising and marketing and commerce utility offerings:
The deal, topic to regulatory approval, is expected to proximate in mid-2019. At that aspect, the assets might live equipped into a newly branded standalone enterprise led with the aid of current IBM VP impress Simpson and different IBM veterans.
IBM has been selling off a lot of slow-growth or contracting assets in synchronous quarters. Examples encompass:
IBM is anticipated to declar its latest quarterly consequences on April sixteen, 2019. despite the fact the company has made some growth with cloud, AI and quantum computing, critics continue to seek information from yourself if the traffic can in fact revert to a increase corporation. In its this plunge of 2018, salary fell three p.c to $21.eight billion.Return domestic
When IBM purchased Lotus for $3.5 billion in 1995, it appeared as even though the venerable computing significant was basically to lock up the software industry and coast to unstoppable earnings.
Eighteen years later, Lotus looks extra dote a millstone round IBM’s neck than a flywheel giving it added velocity.
in keeping with a document within the Wall highway Journal, in strengthen of IBM’s this autumn profits liberate nowadays, Lotus changed into the weakest performer in IBM’s utility portfolio, shedding 6.4 % of its income quantity in the first 9 months of 2012.
It likely accounts for about $1 billion in annual income, in response to estimates sourced via the WSJ, or one-sixth to one-fifth of IBM’s simple software enterprise.
ironically, Lotus once led the manner towards nowadays’s hottest enterprise technologies, the collaborative application that helps teams discourse and work together on initiatives. probably the most success reports of that area of interest is Yammer, which Microsoft received ultimate yr for $1.2 billion. So, why is IBM sitting at the back of the pack as a substitute of main from the entrance?
Lotus, which made the first blockbuster “killer app” within the Nineteen Eighties (Lotus 1-2-three, a phenomenally a hit spreadsheet software), went on to create Lotus Notes, a powerful groupware suite that got here out within the early Nineteen Nineties earlier than anybody had any concept what “groupware” changed into.
I used it noticeably at a number of agencies I worked with. originally, it was occult and strong. dote most conclusion-clients of Lotus Notes, I used it primarily as an e mail software. It had its quirks, nevertheless it worked. however there become one other dimension to Notes, an impressive, programmable backend that assist you to create databases and workspaces for collaborative work, contact management, suggestions sharing, and communique.
nowadays, we’d denomination it a collaboration device or a company social-media device, and it could live internet-based and requisites-compliant, dote Yammer, Jive, and Huddle. in the absence of necessities, Notes’ engineers had to invent every thing themselves, making it a politic however proprietary solution.
however lengthy before those net-based mostly startups got here alongside, Notes was already dropping its cool. The client software grew to live great and bloated. It was expensive to space into result and elaborate to customise.
because the internet received popularity in the late Nineteen Nineties, Lotus introduced necessities, dote POP3 and IMAP email interfaces. They didn’t result so neatly with the requirements department, besides the fact that children, using any one who needed to disburse a web mail client with a Lotus Notes mail server fully insane.
The upshot is that, just as the internet became known, Lotus Notes grew to become worrying and obsolete.
bound, it became noiseless potent, but unlocking the vigour of Notes frequently required expert talents, giving surge to a sector of Notes consultants. No shock that these consultants are having a tough time getting taken critically nowadays. The WSJ quotes a Notes consultant who complains about his reception:
“i'm going to a party, and i shortly derive insulted,” says Eugen Tarnow, a director of the consultancy Avalon company methods, which sells the aging electronic mail application to businesses. “they are saying, ‘Lotus Notes, that’s nonetheless round?’ It’s no fun.”
sadly, IBM’s engineers realized the value of necessities compliance too late and didn’t bake interoperability into Lotus Notes smartly adequate or early sufficient. So, as powerful as Notes could be, it was and is ill-organized to work in nowadays’s API-prosperous cloud atmosphere.
IBM has extra synchronous social-media application, too, but most efficacious makes about $fifty five million per yr from that aspect of its business. So the challenge for IBM is to proceed milking as an terrible lot salary as it can from Lotus, while progressively poignant the branding and the earnings to more recent, sexier traces of enterprise. One example: Renaming its annual Lotus convention, Lotusphere, as “Connect2013.” Yeah, that’ll assist.
We’ll live looking at to explore if the revenue document sheds to any extent further gentle on IBM’s efforts to account for Notes round. however as for me, I’m now not preserving my breath.
photo credit score: Andrew Mason via photopin cc
While it is difficult errand to pick solid certification questions/answers assets regarding review, reputation and validity since individuals derive sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets as for exam dumps update and validity. The greater fragment of other's sham report objection customers gain to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams cheerfully and effortlessly. They never bargain on their review, reputation and quality because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer conviction is imperative to us. Extraordinarily they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report grievance, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. On the off random that you observe any inaccurate report posted by their rivals with the denomination killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com protestation or something dote this, simply bethink there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of well-behaved administrations because of their advantages. There are a distinguished many fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their instance questions and test brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.
TK0-201 test prep | LOT-412 dump | 1Z0-408 questions and answers | C2170-008 cheat sheets | 71-169 dumps | 000-296 dumps questions | GE0-803 brain dumps | HP0-J56 free pdf download | 499-01 brain dumps | C9520-422 actual questions | 000-N33 exercise questions | HP2-Z18 test questions | 000-852 examcollection | LOT-836 actual questions | HP0-A22 questions answers | 922-102 free pdf | 310-019 pdf download | 3002 exam prep | 000-382 exercise test | 300-320 exercise test |
Take a gander at these LOT-986 actual question and answers
killexams.com IBM Certification study guides are setup via IT experts. Most people complaint that there are an examcollection of questions in this kind of giant quantity of education exams and exam resource, and they may live these days can not afford to manage the fee of any extra. Seeing killexams.com experts training session this a ways reaching rendition while nevertheless assurance that every one the getting to know is secured after profound research and exam.
At killexams.com, they give absolutely surveyed IBM LOT-986 exam prep which will live the best to pass LOT-986 exam, and to derive certified with the assist of LOT-986 braindumps. It is a distinguished choice to hurry up your position as an expert in the Information Technology enterprise. They are thrilled with their notoriety of helping individuals pass the LOT-986 exam of their first attempt. Their prosperity costs in the preceding years were completely incredible, due to their upbeat clients who presently equipped to impel their positions inside the speedy manner. killexams.com is the primary conclusion amongst IT professionals, especially the ones who are hoping to pace up the progression tiers quicker in their character associations. IBM is the commercial enterprise pioneer in facts innovation, and getting certified via them is an ensured technique to live successful with IT positions. They allow you to result exactly that with their excellent IBM LOT-986 exam prep dumps.
IBM LOT-986 is rare bar nothing over the globe, and the commercial enterprise and programming arrangements gave through them are being grasped by means of each one of the agencies. They occupy helped in using a huge sweep of corporations at the beyond any doubt shot manner of achievement. Far achieving studying of IBM objects are regarded as a critical functionality, and the experts certified by using them are especially esteemed in bar nothing associations.
We deliver genuine LOT-986 pdf exam questions and answers braindumps in arrangements. Download PDF and exercise Tests. Pass IBM LOT-986 Exam swiftly and effectively. The LOT-986 braindumps PDF kindhearted is obtainable for perusing and printing. You can print more and more and exercise mainly. Their pass rate is immoderate to 98% and the comparability fee among their LOT-986 syllabus prep usher and dependable exam is 90% in mild of their seven-year coaching history. result you want successs within the LOT-986 exam in handiest one strive? I am sure now after analyzing for the IBM LOT-986 actual exam.
killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for bar nothing exams on internet site
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders extra than $ninety nine
DECSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for bar nothing Orders
As the simplest factor that is in any manner vital prerogative here is passing the LOT-986 - Creating IBM Lotus Notes and Domino 8.5(R) Applications with Xpages and Advanced Techniques exam. As bar nothing which you require is a lofty score of IBM LOT-986 exam. The just a unmarried aspect you exigency to result is downloading braindumps of LOT-986 exam maintain in irony directs now. They will not let you down with their unconditional guarantee. The professionals likewise maintain pace with the maximum up and coming exam with the goal to give the more a fragment of updated materials. One yr lax derive prerogative of entry to occupy the capability to them via the date of purchase. Each applicant may additionally endure the cost of the LOT-986 exam dumps through killexams.com at a low cost. Frequently there may live a markdown for every body all.
The best pass to derive achievement in the IBM LOT-986 exam is that you ought to acquire solid preparatory materials. They guarantee that killexams.com is the most direct pathway toward Implementing IBM Creating IBM Lotus Notes and Domino 8.5(R) Applications with Xpages and Advanced Techniques exam. You will live triumphant with plenary certainty. You can observe free questions at killexams.com before you purchase the LOT-986 exam items. Their reproduced tests are the same As the actual exam design. The questions and answers made by the guaranteed experts. They give you the experience of stepping through the actual examination. 100% guarantee to pass the LOT-986 actual test.
killexams.com IBM Certification study guides are setup by IT experts. Loads of understudies occupy been griping that an immoderate number of questions in such huge numbers of exercise exams and study aides, and they are simply worn out to manage the cost of any more. Seeing killexams.com specialists work out this complete adaptation while noiseless guarantee that bar nothing the information is secured after profound research and examination. Everything is to build accommodation for hopefuls on their street to certification.
We occupy Tested and Approved LOT-986 Exams. killexams.com gives the most exact and latest IT exam materials which nearly hold bar nothing learning focuses. With the usher of their LOT-986 examine materials, you don't exigency to squander your chance on perusing majority of reference books and simply exigency to burn through 10-20 hours to ace their LOT-986 actual questions and answers. Furthermore, they furnish you with PDF Version and Software Version exam questions and answers. For Software Version materials, Its offered to give the applicants reenact the IBM LOT-986 exam in a actual domain.
We give free update. Inside legitimacy period, if LOT-986 brain dumps that you occupy acquired updated, they will counsel you by email to download latest adaptation of . if you don't pass your IBM Creating IBM Lotus Notes and Domino 8.5(R) Applications with Xpages and Advanced Techniques exam, They will give you plenary refund. You occupy to dispatch the filtered duplicate of your LOT-986 exam report card to us. Subsequent to affirming, they will rapidly give you plenary REFUND.
killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017: 60% Discount Coupon for bar nothing exams on website
PROF17: 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17: 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
DECSPECIAL: 10% Special Discount Coupon for bar nothing Orders
if you derive ready for the IBM LOT-986 exam utilizing their testing engine. It is anything but difficult to prevail for bar nothing certifications in the first attempt. You don't exigency to manage bar nothing dumps or any free downpour/rapidshare bar nothing stuff. They proffer free demo of every IT Certification Dumps. You can explore at the interface, question quality and ease of disburse of their exercise exams before you elect to purchase.
LOT-986 Practice Test | LOT-986 examcollection | LOT-986 VCE | LOT-986 study guide | LOT-986 practice exam | LOT-986 cram
Killexams 3102-1 braindumps | Killexams HP2-Z24 exercise Test | Killexams P2050-007 study guide | Killexams ISS-001 test questions | Killexams 000-082 test prep | Killexams 300-550 braindumps | Killexams A4120-784 study guide | Killexams C2090-719 brain dumps | Killexams 10-184 study guide | Killexams HP2-E28 questions and answers | Killexams TB0-118 test prep | Killexams 000-608 free pdf | Killexams VCS-272 free pdf download | Killexams 312-50v9 actual questions | Killexams EX0-004 test prep | Killexams 156-515 cheat sheets | Killexams GRE brain dumps | Killexams 000-596 exercise test | Killexams 00M-240 exam prep | Killexams CCA-470 dump |
Killexams P2065-749 test prep | Killexams EUCOC braindumps | Killexams 922-089 study guide | Killexams LOT-825 free pdf | Killexams HP0-429 dump | Killexams HP2-Z05 brain dumps | Killexams HP3-X01 exam prep | Killexams 9A0-136 exercise exam | Killexams 920-544 questions and answers | Killexams 920-166 actual questions | Killexams ST0-147 test questions | Killexams ASVAB exercise test | Killexams A2040-441 braindumps | Killexams C2140-138 dumps | Killexams 650-148 bootcamp | Killexams 000-026 examcollection | Killexams M2050-655 dumps questions | Killexams HP0-J39 free pdf | Killexams HP0-M58 questions and answers | Killexams 000-331 mock exam |
Effective communication is central to patient safety and quality. Inadequate communication consistently appears as a factor contributing to medical errors, across settings and practitioners. These span from an incident with a unique patient1 to broader communication issues between physicians and nurses.2 In reviews of malpractice claims, communication problems were contributing factors in 26% to 31% of cases.3–5 The Joint Commission has reviewed data from 6,244 sentinel events occurring between 1995 and June 30, 2009.6 Communication problems occupy long been illustrious as a major contributing factor to these sentinel events. Sutcliffe et al7 conducted semistructured interviews with residents, who recalled 70 recent medical mishaps, and indicated that 91% contained communication failures.
Handoffs, the transfer of patient supervision from one health supervision provider to another, are known to live vulnerable to communication failures8 and occupy been called “remarkably haphazard.”9 As defined by the Joint Commission, handoff communication refers to a standardized process “in which information about patient/client/resident supervision is communicated in a consistent manner.”10
Retrospective reviews of malpractice claims in the ambulatory setting11 and emergency department12 showed that handoffs were a contributing factor in 20% and 24% of medical errors, respectively. When looking specifically at malpractice cases with communication breakdowns, 43% involved handoffs.13 A review of 146 surgical errors establish that 41 (28%) involved handoffs.14 Of residents and fellows who reported caring for a patient with an adverse event, 15% indicated the intuition for the mistake was a problem with handoffs.15
Numerous surveys document health supervision staff concern. In an Agency for Healthcare Research and quality 2008 survey, just over half (51%) of the 160,176 hospital staff respondents reported that “important patient supervision information is often lost during shift changes.”16 When 93 fourth-year medical students and 228 residents responded to a survey about patient safety, (70%) agreed that improved handoffs would reduce medical mishaps.17
Reduced resident duty hours were first introduced in fresh York state in 1989 and were mandated for bar nothing U.S. residency programs in 2003. Although reductions in duty hours may lead to less fatigue and improved well-being in residents, many occupy expressed concern about the resultant exigency for increased handoffs and reduced continuity of patient care.18 As a result of reduced hours, patients can live seen by three different physicians in the first 24 hours of their care.19 Seventy-six percent of 29 surgical residents in a fresh York study agreed that continuity of supervision had been negatively affected as a result of duty hours changes.20
Discontinuity in patient care, which can occur with cross-coverage and night float systems, has been establish to lead to increased in-hospital complications,21 preventable adverse events,22 increased cost due to unnecessary tests being ordered by residents not chummy with the patient,19 and diagnostic test delays.21 In a study at one teaching hospital during a four-month period, the risk of a preventable adverse event was strongly associated (more than twice as likely) with coverage by a physician from another team.22
Night float systems, often implemented to ensure that residents result not exceed duty hours limits, occupy been illustrious to result in inadequate information transfer to the covering residents.23 Nurses occupy expressed concern over these changes. Fifty-one percent of the 67 nurses who responded to a survey about a fresh resident night float system agreed that “residents don’t know the patients as well as in the worn system.”24
Other issues surrounding attending physicians’ and residents’ handoffs occupy been documented. Gandhi25 notes that inadequate handoffs can lead to diffused responsibility, which can live a major contributor to medical errors. In addition, Coiera26 establish that health supervision communications are recumbent to interruptions, with a third of communication events (30.6%) interrupted.27 Many of these interruptions result in inefficiencies,28 and interruptions during handoffs are likely to lead to failures of working memory,29 which result in decreased recall accuracy.
In 2006, the average length of stay for bar nothing hospitalized patients was 4.8 days.30 Assuming that patient supervision transfers between covering residents and/or attending physicians occur 1 to 2 times per day, the average patient will live handed off 5 to 10 times per admission. Each of these handoffs represents a risk for inadequate communication, which could result in reduced patient safety and increased medical errors.
In response to concerns about inadequate health supervision handoffs, a number of national patient safety organizations occupy highlighted the significance of communication, including the Institute for Healthcare Communication31 and the National quality Forum. In 2006, the Joint Commission created a fresh National Patient Safety Goal on handoffs.32 In 2009, the goal remains virtually unchanged, requiring the organization to implement “a standardized approach to hand-off communications, including an chance to seek information from and respond to questions.”33
As the preceding paragraphs suggest, there is abundant evidence of the negative consequences of impecunious communication and inadequate handoffs in health care. The purpose of the current study was to identify bar nothing English-language articles on resident and/or attending physicians’ handoffs in the United States, conduct a systematic review of research studies, discharge a qualitative review of barriers and strategies mentioned across bar nothing articles, and identify features of structured handoffs that occupy been shown to live effective. This review was conducted in conjunction with the Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers National Initiative: Improving Patient supervision Through GME. The National Initiative was a collaborative formed in 2007 that linked residency programs in 19 teaching hospitals across the United States in efforts to integrate academics and quality through projects coordinated at a national level.Method National initiative work group
A work group of the National Initiative developed resources and wrote systematic reviews of the literature in advocate of the National Initiative's goals. They performed this study as one of a train of literature reviews initiated by that group. The methodology that they employed included regular, substantive discussions about manuscript concept and design, such as key questions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and search strategies. There were critical interchanges among us about bar nothing Important aspects of each systematic review written by this group, including those for this report, and they reached consensus on how to handle each systematic review. The specific subject, arrogate technique, and final presentation of this systematic review are the product of a progressive, iterative, and qualitative process of refinement.Literature search
We conducted a thorough and systematic literature search of English-language articles published on handoffs from 1987 to June 4, 2008 using Ovid Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, and Christiana supervision plenary Text Journals@Ovid, followed by reference section review. The search terms used were hand-off$, handoff$, signout$, token out$, sign-out$, handover$, hand-over$, signover$, and sign-over$. A total of 2,590 articles were identified. bar nothing titles were reviewed for feasible inclusion, and 401 articles were obtained for further review (Figure 1). Reference sections of bar nothing 401 articles were reviewed for additional articles.Inclusion criteria
Articles meeting the following criteria were eligible for review of barriers and strategies: English language, indexed in PubMed, published between 1987 and June 4, 2008, focused on health supervision handoffs in the United States, and including information about either resident or attending physicians’ handoffs. Articles included in the systematic review had one of the following study designs: randomized controlled trial; nonrandomized trial, with control or comparison group; single-group pre- and posttest, cohort study; single-group cross-sectional research; single-group posttest only, or qualitative research.
Trained reviewers (J.L. and L.R.) deemed that 46 articles met inclusion criteria for the initial review of barriers and strategies. Using an iterative process, an abstraction figure was developed to confirm eligibility for plenary review, assess article characteristics, and extract data material to the study questions. This iterative process started with an initial form, which was used by two reviewers (J.L. and L.R.) to independently abstract data from four articles. The reviewers then met to debate the abstraction figure for inclusion of bar nothing material data. A second, more circumstantial figure was then created for abstraction. Reviewers (J.L. and J.M.) independently abstracted bar nothing data. Most abstraction disagreements were minor, and bar nothing disagreements were quickly resolved during discussion, when a consensus was reached on the abstracted data.Quality scoring system
Downs and Black34 created a convincing and dependable checklist designed to assess both experimental and observational studies. Two systematic reviews35,36 of published systems (scales and checklists) designed to assess study quality occupy ranked the scale developed by Downs and Black as one of the best. Both of these systematic reviews went on to intimate that some modifications might live useful, depending on the specific topic and study designs. Therefore, five of us (L.R., J.L., J.M., J.J., J.S.P.) developed a quality scoring figure based on this approach, using four of the original items and eight modified items, which yielded scores ranging from 1 to 16, with 16 being the highest feasible score (see Chart 1). This quality scoring figure contained two items related to study kind and sample size, five items related to reporting, and five items related to internal validity.
If a study included multiple assessment formats, such as interviews and a questionnaire, that resulted in different sample sizes, the largest sample was used as the sample size in the quality scoring form. There was no pass to determine the number of independent study participants for each assessment method. Thus, to avoid counting the same study participant multiple times, they credited the study with the largest reported sample only.
Quality scores were independently obtained from reviewer pairs (L.R. and J.L. or J.J.) for each study. The interrater reliability was assessed for bar nothing identified research studies (n = 18). Overall agreement was 97.7%, and Cohen's kappa for agreement between the two reviewers was r = 0.96, P < .001. bar nothing differences were resolved through discussion to yield a final quality score for each study.Qualitative analysis of barriers and strategies
Conventional content analysis is a kind of qualitative research used when there is limited or no existing theory on the phenomenon of interest.37 This analysis involves an iterative process that allows themes to arise from data. Researchers immerse themselves in the content and allow categories to emerge.37
All barriers and strategies mentioned in the reviewed articles were identified and listed in phrase format in two continuous lists, one for strategies and another for barriers. Reviewers (J.L. and L.R.) met to compare lists and, through discussion, agreed on final comprehensive lists. Through an inductive iterative process, category labels were created and bar nothing phrases were moved to a category or subcategory. The final lists were reviewed by J.M. for coherence and consistency.Results
Forty-six articles describing resident and/or attending physicians’ handoffs were identified. Thirty-three (71.7%) were published between 2005 and 2008 (Figure 2). Content analysis yielded 91 barriers in eight major categories and 140 strategies in seven major categories (Table 1).
Twenty-two articles presented anecdotal data,38–58 one of which had a physician handoffs case instance and nursing handoffs research59; three provided circumscribed reviews,60–62 and three were editorials.63–65 The remaining 18 articles reported research on handoffs and were analyzed in depth (see the Appendix).66–83 Only one80 research study did not involve residents or occupy a graduate medical education focus. quality assessment scores for the research studies ranged from 1 to 13 (possible sweep 1–16). Six studies obtained scores of 8 or less, eight had scores between 8.5 and 11.5, and four achieved quality scores of 12 to 13.
Only 6 of 18 (33.3%) research studies identified efficacious handoff features.66,67,69,71,77,78 In studies comparing computerized handoff systems with other methods, such as personal handwritten notes, the computerized or electronic system performed better. Residents were more likely to occupy bar nothing patients on their list,67 to report that they received bar nothing Important information,78 to occupy increased satisfaction with the handoff system,67 to disburse less time in prerounding and rounding activities,67 and to self-report decreased adverse events related to handoffs.77 Others occupy illustrious that resident-maintained lists in a database, such as a Microsoft Word file or exceed database, hold content and medication errors.69,71 However, interns using standardized, self-maintained sign-out cards reported fewer impecunious sign-outs and were more likely to record code status, patient age, and allergies.66Discussion
As stated earlier, they identified 46 articles describing residents’ and attending physicians’ handoffs in the United States. Eighteen were research studies (39.1%), only two of which were randomized controlled trials. The majority (71.7%) of articles were published in recent years, which is not surprising, given the Joint Commission's National Patient Safety Goal on handoffs issued in 2006. However, as demonstrated by their quality assessment scores (see the Appendix), there is a remarkable lack of high-quality outcomes studies. It is notable that one third of the reviewed research studies obtained quality scores at or below 8 (out of a feasible 16), and only one study achieved a score of 13.
One purpose of the current study was to identify features of physicians’ handoffs that occupy been shown to live effective. Unfortunately, only 6 of the 18 (33.3%) research studies included measures of effectiveness. Of the three studies using computerized handoff systems, one was a stand-alone system,78 and the other two had some linkage with the hospital computer system.67,77 While these bar nothing provided a structured template, they besides relied to varying degrees on residents to enter information, which introduces an chance for errors to occur.69,71 Most of the studies assessing effectiveness used self-reported data, with a few exceptions. Van Eaton and colleagues67 looked at the number of patients missed on resident rounds and showed a reduce from 5 to 2.5 patients/team/month (P = .0001) when using a computerized handoff system. Two other studies assessed errors on resident-maintained handoff forms when compared with the medical record69,71 (a surrogate for actual medical errors) and, not surprisingly, establish errors on the resident lists.
Of note, two survey studies documented a lack of formal handoffs instruction during residency, with 60% to 74.4% (internal medicine72 and emergency medicine,73 respectively) reporting that they occupy no lectures or workshops on the topic. Although 72.3% of the 185 emergency medicine residency/fellowship program directors studied agreed that standardized handoffs would reduce medical errors,73 the majority did not occupy a uniform policy or procedure regarding handoffs. Only one of the studies reviewed here included the development, implementation, and assessment of a formal, structured handoffs curriculum.75 Horwitz and colleagues75 provide a comprehensive curricular template for others to use; however, they relied on postsession evaluations of perceived comfort and significance of handoffs. They commend their contrivance to conduct observation of handoff skills and explore forward to their future publications.
Almost bar nothing of the research articles (17 of 18; 94%) were conducted within a residency program. Graduate medical education has taken the lead in conducting handoffs research, which is one demonstration of the value added to health supervision by medical education.Handoff barriers
We identified 91 barriers to efficacious handoffs that could live organized into eight major categories. Of barrier categories, communication issues were reported most frequently (30.8%), with common communication barriers ranging from not listening to inadequate communication. Because efficacious communication is an essential component of handoffs, this was an expected finding. However, hierarchy and social barriers constituted a less intuitive group. Here, they establish things such as relational communication barriers and residents not being likely to hand off work to more senior residents, because of a rigid reliance on hierarchical norms that prohibit such behavior. Thus, adequately addressing handoff issues will require more than protocols, structure, and training. Understanding the intricate social structures and hierarchies in which residents and attending physicians work, as well as the unwritten rules that govern the handoff of patient responsibilities, will live required.Handoff strategies
We identified 140 strategies that could live organized into seven major categories. Strategies for standardization were illustrious most frequently (44.3%), with technological solutions (16.4%), such as computerized handoff systems, next. Interestingly, whereas communication issues constituted approximately one third of barriers, improving communication skills was illustrious much less frequently (11.4%) as a strategy. Standardization would address some communication issues, but not all, such as language differences. Providing training or education (10%), evaluating the process (7.1%), and addressing environmental issues (5.7%), such as lighting and limiting interruptions and noise, build intuitive sense. However, a less obvious strategy was insuring the recognition that a transfer of responsibility/accountability (5.0%) had occurred.Limitations and strengths
Handoffs in a variety of environments were studied, which makes it difficult to disburse their findings to formulate barriers and strategies for disburse in every handoff situation. For example, some techniques may live better applied to inpatient medicine as opposed to the emergency department. In addition, they abstracted barriers and strategies from bar nothing sections of the articles studied, including the introduction. This may occupy resulted in overemphasis of some barriers or strategies, depending on the author's views and on repetition. However, they only counted the same barrier or strategy multiple times if the wording was significantly different in subsequent disburse and if the two instances could stand alone as different aspects of the same category.
Another potential limitation is that the barriers and strategies they identified (Table 1) delineate the opinions of the authors of the reviewed studies. Further, they identified the barriers and strategies through a qualitative process. Although they look intuitively relevant, they were not derived from research studies designed to identify handoff barriers and strategies.
The current study is limited by the Ovid search strategy used. Specifically, the selected search terms may not occupy included bar nothing material terms. They strengthened the possibility of identifying bar nothing articles that met inclusion criteria by reviewing the reference sections of bar nothing obtained articles. Although this strategy minimizes the risk of missing germane studies, it does not liquidate the possibility.
Publication jaundice refers to the possibility that high-quality studies with negative results may not occupy been published. Others occupy illustrious that many quality improvement (QI) projects are not published.84 In addition, it has been their observation that some QI projects are published in newsletters, with the authors never submitting them to peer-reviewed journals. Thus, there may live outcomes studies of handoffs that are not in the peer-reviewed literature. However, the specific search strategy, limpid inclusion criteria, and systematic process used to identify and evaluate articles strengthen the quality of this review.
Although their quality scoring system was based on a validated methodology developed to assess experimental and observational studies together, their system has not been validated across multiple settings and investigators. The relative weightings may require refinement, and there may prove to live additional material categories. The system did occupy a lofty internal reliability, and reviewers of various educational backgrounds and experience establish it straightforward and facile to use. Further, the quality scoring system provides a reproducible template for the assessment of handoffs articles.Recommendations
Numerous authors occupy illustrious the dearth of research focused on handoffs.45,57,70,83,85,86 In addition, there are risks involved in implementing interventions without evidence supporting their effectiveness.87 Winters and colleagues87(p1,647) illustrious that “[n]ational efforts to improve patient safety should live supported by sufficiently tough evidence to warrant such a commitment of resources.”
Evidence-based exercise is informed by high-quality research. Recent publication guidelines for patient safety and quality initiatives occupy established a framework for standardized reporting.88,89 They recommend that future handoffs studies disburse the Standards for quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) guidelines.89 Many of the studies reviewed here would occupy been improved by doing so.
Others occupy illustrious that it may live unreasonable to anticipate patient safety and quality studies to supervene the design rigors of randomized controlled trials.87 However, the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness manner provides a structured, rigorous manner to synthesize data from other clinical study types with expert view to provide the best available guidelines.90 Unfortunately, the literature on handoffs identified here is not of sufficient quality and quantity to synthesize into evidence-based recommendations.
Although the Joint Commission is calling for structured handoffs, they identified very shrimp evidence to advocate the disburse of any specific structure, protocol, or method. However, direct observation of handoffs in other settings (i.e., NASA mission control, nuclear power, railroad, and ambulance dispatch) with lofty consequences for error, yielded 21 common strategies,91 which could proffer a starting point in the progress of health supervision handoffs research. Their review of the U.S. physicians’ handoffs literature has led us to develop a list of research questions, organized by the content domains of knowledge, attitudes, skills, process outcomes, and clinical outcomes (see List 1).
Across the United States, hospitals are implementing structured handoff protocols in an application to comply with Joint Commission requirements. High-quality outcomes studies that focus on systems factors, human performance, and the effectiveness of protocols and interventions are urgently needed. These studies should address the barriers and strategies identified here. In addition, handoffs in different disciplines are likely to occupy different requirements and issues. For instance, an emergency department handoff will exigency to occupy different content than one for inpatient medicine or pediatrics. Therefore, researchers should conduct discipline-specific handoff studies.
We convene for rigorous outcomes studies designed to (1) assess the effectiveness of handoffs, (2) determine the elements of handoffs that lead to improved patient outcomes, and (3) identify the best implementation strategies. Finally, these studies should live reported using the SQUIRE guidelines. Without these studies, hospitals across the United States are destined to dissipate time, resources, and application on flawed handoff practices.Acknowledgments
Special thanks to Ellen M. Justice, MLIS, AHIP, medical librarian of the Lewis B. Flinn Medical Library, Christiana supervision Health System, for conducting literature searches; Dolores Ann Moran, medical library coadjutant II, and Janice Evans, medical library coadjutant II, for their assistance in locating articles; and Donald Riesenberg, MD, for feedback on the manuscript.References 1Chassin MR, Becher EC. The wrong patient. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:826–833. 2Donchin Y, Gopher D, Olin M, et al. A explore into the nature and causes of human errors in the intensive supervision unit. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12:143–148. 3Beckman HB, Markakis KM, Suchman AL, Frankel RM. The doctor–patient relationship and malpractice: Lessons from plaintiff depositions. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:1365–1370. 4White AA, Wright SW, Blanco R, et al. Cause-and-effect analysis of risk management files to assess patient supervision in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1035–1041. 5White AA, Pichert JW, Bledsoe SH, Irwin C, Entman SS. intuition and result analysis of closed claims in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:1031–1038. 7Sutcliffe KM, Lewton E, Rosenthal MM. Communication failures: An insidious contributor to medical mishaps. Acad Med. 2004;79:186–194. 8Keyes C. Coordination of supervision provision: The role of the ‘handoff.’ Int J Qual Health Care. 2000;12:519. 9Volpp KGM, Grande D. Residents’ suggestions for reducing errors in teaching hospitals. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:851–855. 11Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: A study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:488–496. 12Kachalia A, Gandhi TK, Puopolo AL, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the emergency department: A study of closed malpractice claims from 4 liability insurers. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:196–205. 13Greenberg CC, Regenbogen SE, Studdert DM, et al. Patterns of communication breakdowns resulting in injury to surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:533–540. 14Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery. 2003;133:614–621. 15Jagsi R, Kitch BT, Weinstein DF, Campbell EG, Hutter M, Weissman JS. Residents report on adverse events and their causes. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:2607–2613. 16Agency for Healthcare quality and Research. Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture: 2008 Comparative Database Report. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/hospsurvey08. Accessed August 24, 2009. 17Sorokin R, Riggio JM, Hwang C. Attitudes about patient safety: A survey of physicians-in-training. Am J Med Qual. 2005;20:70–77. 18Fletcher KE, Parekh V, Halasyamani L, et al. work hour rules and contributors to patient supervision mistakes: A focus group study with internal medicine residents. J Hosp Med. 2008;3:228–237. 19Fins JJ. Professional responsibility: A perspective on the Bell Commission reforms. Bull NY Acad Med. 1991;67:359–364. 20Barden CB, Specht MC, McCarter MD, Daly JM, Fahey TJ. Effects of limited work hours on surgical training. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;195:531–538. 21Laine C, Goldman L, Soukup JR, Hayes JG. The impact of a regulation restricting medical house staff working hours on the quality of patient care. JAMA. 1993;269:374–378. 22Petersen LA, Brennan TA, O’Neil AC, Cook EF, Lee TH. Does housestaff discontinuity of supervision increase the risk for preventable adverse events? Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:866–872. 23Charap M. Reducing resident work hours: Unproven assumptions and unforeseen outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:814–815. 24Buff DD, Shabti R. The night float system of resident on call: What result the nurses think? J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10:400–402. 25Gandhi TK. Fumbled handoffs: One dropped ball after another. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:352–358. 26Coiera E. When conversation is better than computation. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7:277–286. 27Coiera EW, Jayasuriya RA, Hardy J, Bannan A, Thorpe MEC. Communication loads on clinical staff in the emergency department. Med J Aust. 2002;176:415–418. 28Coiera E, Tombs V. Communication behaviors in a hospital setting: An observational study. BMJ. 1998;316:673–676. 29Parker J, Coiera E. Improving clinical communication: A view from psychology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7:453–461. 30DeFrances CJ, Lucas CA, Buie VC, Golosinskiy A. 2006 National Hospital Discharge Survey. National Health Statistics Report. July 30, 2008. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr005.pdf. Accessed August 24, 2009. 34Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health supervision interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:377–384. 35West S, King V, Carey TS, et al. Systems to Rate the power of Scientific Evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 47 (Prepared by the Research Triangle Institute-University of North Carolina Evidence-based exercise hub under contract No. 290-97-0011). AHRQ Publication No. 02-E016. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. April 2002. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat1.chapter.70996. Accessed August 24, 2009. 36Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technology Assessment. 2003;7(27). Available at: http://www.ncchta.org/fullmono/mon727.pdf. Accessed August 24, 2009. 37Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277–1288. 38Communication strategies for patient handoffs. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:1503–1505. 39Handoff information should cover past, future. Healthc Risk Manag. 2005;27:94. 40Measure understanding during handoffs: A naval hospital uses an evaluation tool to determine whether information is understood. Brief Patient Saf. 2006:8–9. 41Patient handoff must live more than a formality. Healthc Risk Manag. 2005;27:93. 42Strategies for improving OR handoffs. OR Manager. 2005;21(8):9–10. 43What's wrong with this hand-off? Brief Patient Saf. 2006;7(1):9,12. 44Arora V, Johnson J. National patient safety goals. A model for structure a standardized hand-off protocol. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006;32:646–655. 45Beach C, Croskerry P, Shapiro M. Profiles in patient safety: Emergency supervision transitions. Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10:364–347. 46Chacko V, Varvarelis N, Kemp DG. eHand-offs: An IBM Lotus Domino application for ensuring patient safety and enhancing resident supervision in hand-off communications. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006:874. 47Dracup K, Morris PE. Passing the torch: The challenge of handoffs. Am J Crit Care. 2008;17:95–97. 48Frazer TS. “Doctor's notes”: A computerized manner for managing inpatient care. Fam Med. 1988;20:223–224. 49Goldman L, Pantilat SZ, Winthrop F, Whitcomb WF. Passing the clinical baton: 6 principles to usher the hospitalists. Am J Med. 2001;111(9B):36S–39S. 50Kushniruk A, Karson T, Moore C, Kannry J. From prototype to production system: Lessons learned from the evolution of the SignOut System at Mount Sinai Medical Center. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003:381–385. 51Landucci D, Gipe BT. The technique and science of the handoff: How hospitalists partake data. Hospitalist. 1999;3:4. 52Luo J, Hales RE, Hilty D, Brennan C. Clinical computing: Electronic sign-out using a personal digital assistant. Psychiatr Serv. 2001;52:173–174. 53Mukherjee S. A precarious exchange. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1822–1824. 54Nemeth C, Nunnally M, O’Connor M, Cook R. Creating resilient IT: How the sign-out sheet shows clinicians build healthcare work. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006:584–588. 55Sarkar U, Carter JT, Omachi TA, et al. SynopSIS: Integrating physician sign-out with the electronic medical record. J Hosp Med. 2007;2:336–342. 56Sutker WL. The physician's role in patient safety: What's in it for me? Baylor Univ Med Cent Proc. 2008;21:9–14. 57Vidyarthi AR, Arora V, Schnipper JL, Wall SD, Wachter RM. Managing discontinuity in academic medical centers: Strategies for a safe and efficacious resident sign-out. J Hosp Med. 2006;1:257–266. 58Weinstock M. Transitioning care: H&HN′s ‘Saves Lives Now’ train profiles a better pass to exploit patient handoffs. Hosp Health Netw. 2005;79(6):27–28. 59Haig KM, Sutton S, Whittington J. SBAR: A shared mental model for improving communication between clinicians. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006;32:167–175. 60Arora VM, Johnson JK, Meltzer DO, Humphrey HJ. A theoretical framework and competency-based approach to improving handoffs. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17:11–14. 61Singer JI, Dean J. Emergency physician intershift handovers: An analysis of their transitional care. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2006;22:751–754. 62Solet DJ, Norvell JM, Rutan GH, Frankel RM. Lost in translation: Challenges and opportunities in physician-to-physician communication during patient handoffs. Acad Med. 2005;80:1094–1099. 63Guise JM, Lowe NK. result you discourse SBAR? J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006;35:313–314. 64Jauhar S. Patient handoffs, or walking along a narrow mountain ledge. Medscape J Med. 2008;10(3):57. 65Philibert I, Leach DC. Re-framing continuity of supervision for this century. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:394–396. 66Lee LH, Levine JA, Schultz HJ. Utility of a standardized sign-out card for fresh medical interns. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:753–755. 67Van Eaton EG, Horvath KD, Lober WB, Rossini AH, Pellegrini CA. A randomized, controlled visitation evaluating the impact of a computerized rounding and sign-out system on continuity of supervision and resident work hours. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200:538–545. 68Lofgren RP, Gottlieb D, Williams RA, moneyed EC. Post-call transfer of resident responsibility: Its result on patient care. J Gen Intern Med. 1990;5:501–505. 69Arora V, Kao J, Lovinger D, Seiden SC, Meltzer D. Medication discrepancies in resident sign-outs and their potential to harm. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1751–1755. 70Borowitz SM, Waggoner-Fountain LA, Bass EJ, Sledd RM. Adequacy of information transferred at resident sign-out (inhospital handover of care): A prospective survey. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17:6–10. 71Frank G, Lawler LA, Jackson AA, Steinberg TH, Lawless ST. Resident miscommunication: Accuracy of the resident sign-out sheet. J Healthc Qual. 2005;27(2):(Web Exclusive):W2-10–W2-14. Available at: http://www.nahq.org/journal/online/pdf/webex0305.pdf. Accessed August 24, 2009. 72Horwitz LI, Krumholz HM, Green ML, Huot SJ. Transfers of patient supervision between house staff on internal medicine wards: A national survey. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1173–1177. 73Sinha M, Shriki J, Salness R, Blackburn PA. exigency for standardized sign-out in the emergency department: A survey of emergency medicine residency and pediatric emergency medicine fellowship program directors. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14:192–196. 74Frank G, Lawless ST, Steinberg TH. Improving physician communication through an automated, integrated sign-out system. J Healthc Inf Manag. 2005;19(4):68–74. 75Horwitz LI, Moin T, Green ML. progress and implementation of an oral sign-out skills curriculum. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1470–1474. 76Kannry J, Moore C. MediSign: Using a Web-based SignOut System to improve provider identification. Proc AMIA Symp. 1999:550–554. 77Petersen LA, Orav EJ, Teich JM, O’Neil AC, Brennan TA. Using a computerized sign-out program to improve continuity of inpatient supervision and preclude adverse events. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1998;24:77–87. 78Ram R, obstruct B. Signing out patients for off-hours coverage: Comparison of manual and computer-aided methods. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1992:114–118. 79Van Eaton EG, Horvath KD, Lober WB, Pellegrini CA. Organizing the transfer of patient supervision information: The progress of a computerized resident sign-out system. Surgery. 2004;136:5–13. 80Apker J, Mallak LA, Gibson SC. Communicating in the “gray zone”: Perceptions about emergency physician–hospitalist handoffs and patient safety. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14:884–894. 81Arora V, Johnson J, Lovinger D, Humphrey HJ, Meltzer DO. Communication failures in patient sign-out and suggestions for improvement: A critical incident analysis. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:401–407. 82Kellogg KC, Breen E, Ferzoco SJ, Zinner MJ, Ashley SW. Resistance to change in surgical residency: An ethnographic study of work hours reform. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;202:630–636. 83Laxmisan A, Hakimzada F, Sayan OR, Green RA, Zhang J, Patel VL. The multitasking clinician: Decision-making and cognitive claim during and after team handoffs in emergency care. Int J Med Inform. 2007;76:801–811. 84Davidoff F, Batalden P. Toward stronger evidence on quality improvement. Draft publication guidelines: The birth of a consensus project. Qua Saf Health Care. 2005;14:319–325. 85Hamilton P, Gemeinhardt G, Mancuso P, Sahlin CL, Ivy L. SBAR and nurse–physician communication: Pilot testing an educational intervention. Nurs Adm Q. 2006;30:295–299. 86Pope BB, Rodzen L, Spross G. Raising the SBAR: How better communication improves patient outcomes. Nursing. 2008;38(3):41–43. 87Winters BD, Pham J, Pronovost PJ. Rapid response teams—Walk, don’t run. JAMA. 2006;296:1645–1647. 88Stevens DP. Why fresh guidelines for reporting improvement research? And why now? Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:314. 90Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness manner User's Manual. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND; 2001. 91Patterson ES, Roth EM, Woods DD, Chow R, Gomes JO. Handoff strategies in settings with lofty consequences for failure: Lessons for health supervision operations. Int J Qual Health Care. 2004;16:125–132. © 2009 Association of American Medical Colleges Source
Academic Medicine84(12):1775-1787, December 2009.Related Videos
Data is temporarily unavailable. gratify try again soon.
3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Avaya [101 Certification Exam(s) ]
AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
CheckPoint [43 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
Citrix [48 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
CPP-Institute [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
CyberArk [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
DELL [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Fortinet [14 Certification Exam(s) ]
Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
HP [752 Certification Exam(s) ]
HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IBM [1533 Certification Exam(s) ]
IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Juniper [65 Certification Exam(s) ]
LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
Microsoft [375 Certification Exam(s) ]
Mile2 [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
NetworkAppliance [39 Certification Exam(s) ]
NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Oracle [282 Certification Exam(s) ]
P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Pegasystems [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
Symantec [135 Certification Exam(s) ]
Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11740069
Wordpress : http://wp.me/p7SJ6L-1ps
Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12306787
Issu : https://issuu.com/trutrainers/docs/lot-986
Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2017/11/looking-for-lot-986-exam-dumps-that.html
RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/WhereCanIGetHelpToPassLot-986Exam
Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/j2xhiiseg3lbuu8vafwebqiymke536kq
zoho.com : https://docs.zoho.com/file/62c5063d2be48003245c5b0ffd51ca1ebe1aa
is specialized in Architectural visualization , Industrial visualization , 3D Modeling ,3D Animation , Entertainment and Visual Effects .