Emergency handover of critical patients is used to describe the moment of union between prehospital and hospital health team. However, the literature shows several definitions leading to great heterogeneity. To study the emergency handover of critical patients between two critical-emergency care wards performed by emergency nurses worldwide and to identify the features of these processes. We conducted an integrative review in eleven databases published from 2010 to 2019. Quality criteria and PRISMA checklist were applied. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020182335). A total of 22 studies included and the following factors were identified: variability vs standardization, identification, professionals' behavior, localization, environmental factors, patient participation, clinical records, education/training, responsability, and communication. The actual emergency handover occurs under conditions quite contrary to those recommended by experts so that it is neither safe nor effective, leading a serious problem for patient safety and quality care.

The emergency handover of critical patients is used to describe the moment when responsibility for the care of a patient is transferred from one critical patient care healthcare team to another, requiring the accurate delivery of information. However, the literature provides few validated assessment tools for the transfer of critical patients in urgent care and emergency settings. To identify the available evaluation tools that assess the handover of critical patients in urgent and emergency care settings in addition to evaluations of their psychometric properties, a systematic review was carried out using PubMed, Scopus, Cinahl, Web of Science (WoS), and PsycINFO, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The quality of the studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Finally, eight articles were identified, of which only three included validated tools for evaluating the handover of critical patients in emergency care. Content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency were the most studied psychometric properties. Three studies evaluated error and reliability, criterion validity, hypothesis testing, and sensitivity. None of them considered cross-cultural adaptation or the translation process. This systematic psychometric review shows the existing ambiguities in the handover of critically ill patients and the scarcity of validated evaluation tools. For all of these reasons, we consider it necessary to further investigate urgent care and emergency handover settings through the design and validation of an assessment tool.

Background: Proficient management of noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) demands competence, coupled with their seamless mobilization in clinical practice in managing respiratory failure. The COVID‐19 pandemic necessitated the rapid integration of less experienced professionals and nursing students into Intensive Care Units (ICUs), highlighting a need for efficient NIMV training. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a theoretical‐practical training and simulation‐based educational strategy in improving NIMV knowledge and clinical competence. Method: Teaching sessions were conducted between April and June 2021. Participants underwent a 3‐h theoretical‐practical session followed by a 1.5‐h simulation. Knowledge acquisition was assessed using an ad hoc multiple‐choice test. Separately, self‐perceived competence was evaluated using the validated COM‐VA questionnaire at three time points: preintervention, posttheoretical‐practical formation and postsimulation. Nonparametric statistical tests were used to analyse the changes in knowledge and competence. Results: The study included 66 participants (30 students and 36 professionals) and found significant improvements in both knowledge and self‐perceived competence across the educational intervention. Knowledge test scores rose from 82.2% preintervention to 90.2% postsimulation ( p < 0.05). Median COM‐VA scores also significantly increased from 6.82 (IQR = 1.33) preintervention to 7.38 (IQR = 1.45) postsimulation ( p < 0.001). While the theoretical‐practical session led to the largest knowledge gain, simulation provided additional benefit. Conclusion: A combined theoretical‐practical and simulation‐based educational intervention demonstrated effectiveness in significantly enhancing the knowledge and self‐perceived clinical competence of nursing students and professionals in our study group in NIMV management. This rapid and effective training strategy has important implications for preparing healthcare personnel, particularly during emergency situations like the COVID‐19 pandemic, potentially contributing to improved patient safety.

Background/Objectives: Patient handover is the process by which the responsibility for care is transferred from one health care professional to another. Given the lack of validated scales to assess the handover of critically ill patients, our aim was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Instrumento de Evaluación de la Transferencia de Enfermos Críticos (IETEC) (English: Instrument for the Evaluation of Handovers in Critically Ill Patients). Methods: Psychometric analysis of the reliability and validity (construct, convergent, and discriminant) of the IETEC. This single-center study included professionals (nurses, physicians, and emergency medical technicians) involved in the care of the critically ill in urgent care and emergency situations. Results: We evaluated 147 handovers of critically ill patients. The KR-20 score was 0.87, indicting good internal consistency. Of the 147 handovers, 117 (79.6%) were classified as unsafe and 30 (20.4%) as safe. The model fit showed an acceptable construct validity (24 items and four factors: Identification, Communication, Quality, and Family). The Communication domain had the strongest correlation with the total scale (r = 0.876) while Family had the weakest (r = 0.706). The Communication and Family domains were closely correlated (r = 0.599). The IETEC reliably differentiated between safe and unsafe handovers, with a mean (SD) score of 26.3 (1.2) versus 19.0 (4.8), respectively. No significant differences (p = 0.521) in mean IETEC scores were observed between the physicians and nurses. Conclusions: These results show that the IETEC presents adequate psychometric properties and is, therefore, a valid, reliable tool to evaluate handovers in critically ill patients in urgent care and emergency settings.

Objectives: To design and construct an assessment tool for the handover of critical patients in the urgent care and emergency setting. Research methodology This metric and descriptive study comprised two phases in accordance with the Clinical practice guidelines for A Reporting Tool for Adapted Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist. In the first phase, the identification and selection of items related to the handover of critical patients were performed by consensus of a group of experts. The second phase consisted of two stages. In the first stage, the items were selected by applying the e-Delphi technique across two assessment rounds and in the second stage, the items were subjected a pilot test in a real critical patient handover scenario. Professionals from different disciplines and work areas (hospital and prehospital) caring for critically ill patients in the urgency and emergency setting participated in each of the phases. Results: A total of 58 critical patient care, and urgent and emergency care professionals participated in the design and construction of the assessment tool. The initial list consisted of 14 categories and 57 items, which were reduced to 28 items grouped into five categories after the intervention of the participants. The content validity index (CVI) of the instrument was 0.966. Conclusions: This study describes an assessment tool developed in Spanish-language designed to assess the handover of critical patients in the urgent care and emergency setting. This tool has a high CVI, and is the only currently available tool that consider all of the dimensions and characteristics of the handover process. Implications for clinical practice The assessment tool developed in this study could enable critical care professionals in their clinical practice to work in a systematic way, universalizing the handover of critically ill patients in the urgent care and emergency setting through scientifically proven guidelines.

On 11 March 2020, the COVID-19 emergency was declared and a large number of patients were admitted to the ICUs. Consequently, ICUs had to recruit nurses from other units as well as Nursing students without working experience in critical patients care. Since Critical nursing competence is crucial to avoid medical errors, the aim of this study was, to describe the level of safety and nursing competence in critical patient care of recruited nurses and students, during the COVID-19 pandemic in ICUs. A cross-sectional descriptive study of 66 participants using the validated competency assessment questionnaire for nurses in hospital care (COM-VA©) was performed. Our results showed that the level of safety perceived in critical patients care by the students on placement in ICUs and mentors scored higher than the rest of the participants. Interestingly, whereas the participant’s COM-VA© score indicated a level of competence good enough to work autonomously, the supervisor/mentor’s COM-VA© evaluation showed that only the group of students on placement obtained this level of competency. Altogether, we found that students on placement in ICU possesses a higher level of safety and COM-VA© scores than the rest of participants probably due to the close support of the mentor.