Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 406–411

Supplementing Cross-Cover Communication with the Patient Acuity Rating

  • Andrew W. Phillips
  • Trevor C. Yuen
  • Elizabeth Retzer
  • James Woodruff
  • Vineet Arora
  • Dana P. Edelson
Original Research



Patient hand-offs at physician shift changes have limited ability to convey the primary team’s longitudinal insight. The Patient Acuity Rating (PAR) is a previously validated, 7-point scale that quantifies physician judgment of patient stability, where a higher score indicates a greater risk of clinical deterioration. Its impact on cross-covering physician understanding of patients is not known.


To determine PAR contribution to sign-outs.


Cross-sectional survey.


Intern physicians at a university teaching hospital.


Subjects were surveyed using randomly chosen, de-identified patient sign-outs, previously assigned PAR scores by their primary teams. For each sign-out, subjects assigned a PAR score, then responded to hypothetical cross-cover scenarios before and after being informed of the primary team’s PAR.


Changes in intern assessment of the scenario before and after being informed of the primary team’s PAR were measured. In addition, responses between novice and experienced interns were compared.


Between May and July 2008, 23 of 39 (59 %) experienced interns and 25 of 42 (60 %) novice interns responded to 480 patient scenarios from ten distinct sign-outs. The mean PAR score assigned by subjects was 4.2 ± 1.6 vs. 3.8 ± 1.8 by the primary teams (p < 0.001). After viewing the primary team’s PAR score, interns changed their level of concern in 47.9 % of cases, their assessment of the importance of immediate bedside evaluation in 48.7 % of cases, and confidence in their assessment in 43.2 % of cases. For all three assessments, novice interns changed their responses more frequently than experienced interns (p = 0.03, 0.009, and <0.001, respectively). Overall interns reported the PAR score to be theoretically helpful in 70.8 % of the cases, but this was more pronounced in novice interns (81.2 % vs 59.6 %, p < 0.001).


The PAR adds valuable information to sign-outs that could impact cross-cover decision-making and potentially benefit patients. However, correct training in its use may be required to avoid unintended consequences.


hospital medicine medical education assessment methods communication 

Supplementary material

11606_2012_2257_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (69 kb)
ESM 1(PDF 68 kb)


  1. 1.
    Petersen LA, Brennan TA, O’Neil AC, Cook EF, Lee TH. Does housestaff discontinuity of care increase the risk for preventable adverse events? Ann Intern Med. 1994;121(11):866–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vidyarthi AR. Fumbled handoff. AHRQ Web M & M. March 2004. Available at: Accessed: October 4, 2012.
  3. 3.
    Singh H, Thomas EJ, Petersen LA, Studdert DM. Medical errors involving trainees: a study of closed malpractice claims from 5 insurers. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(19):2030–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sutcliffe KM, Lewton E, Rosenthal MM. Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps. Acad Med. 2004;79(2):186–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arora 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(6):401–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Borowitz SM, Waggoner-Fountain LA, Bass EJ, Sledd RM. Adequacy of information transferred at resident sign-out (in-hospital handover of care): a prospective survey. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(1):6–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horwitz LI, Krumholz HM, Green ML, Huot SJ. Transfers of patient care between house staff on internal medicine wards: a national survey. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(11):1173–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Solet 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(12):1094–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vidyarthi AR, Arora V, Schnipper JL, Wall SD, Wachter RM. Managing discontinuity in academic medical centers: strategies for a safe and effective resident sign-out. J Hosp Med. 2006;1(4):257–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horwitz LI, Moin T, Krumholz HM, Wang L, Bradley EH. Consequences of inadequate sign-out for patient care. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(16):1755–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang VY, Arora VM, Lev-Ari S, D’Arcy M, Keysar B. Interns overestimate the effectiveness of their hand-off communication. Pediatrics. 2010;125(3):491–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Horwitz LI, Moin T, Green ML. Development and implementation of an oral sign-out skills curriculum. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(10):1470–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). Task Force on Quality Care and Professionalism. Proposed Standards: Common Program Requirements. 2010. Available at: Accessed: October 4, 2012.
  14. 14.
    Byrne A. Mental workload as a key factor in clinical decision making. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012. doi:10.1007/s10459-012-9360-5.
  15. 15.
    Hodgetts TJ, Kenward G, Vlachonikolis IG, Payne S, Castle N. The identification of risk factors for cardiac arrest and formulation of activation criteria to alert a medical emergency team. Resuscitation. 2012;54(2):125–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edelson DP, Retzer E, Weidman EK, Woodruff J, Davis AM, Minsky BD, et al. Patient acuity rating: quantifying clinical judgment regarding inpatient stability. J Hosp Med. 2011;6(8):475–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirschtick RE. A piece of my mind. Copy-and-paste. JAMA. 2006;295(20):2335–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wohlauer MV, Arora VM, Horwitz LI, Bass EJ, Mahar SE, Philibert I. The patient handoff: a comprehensive curricular blueprint for resident education to improve continuity of care. Acad Med. 2012;87(4):411–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Norman G, Young M, Brooks L. Non-analytical models of clinical reasoning: the role of experience. Med Educ. 2007;41(12):1140–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bachmann LM, Muhleisen A, Bock A, ter Riet G, Held U, Kessels AG. Vignette studies of medical choice and judgment to study caregivers’ medical decision behaviour: systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cooksey RW. Judgment Analysis: theory, Methods, and Applications. San Diego: Academic; 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew W. Phillips
    • 1
  • Trevor C. Yuen
    • 2
  • Elizabeth Retzer
    • 2
  • James Woodruff
    • 2
  • Vineet Arora
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dana P. Edelson
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Pritzker School of MedicineUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of MedicineUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  3. 3.Section of Hospital MedicineUniversity of Chicago HospitalsChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations