Communication handover barriers among nurses and paramedics in emergency care settings: A call for structured interprofessional solutions

  • Hassan Elmi A
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Effective communication during clinical handovers is a fundamental component of patient safety and care continuity, particularly in emergency care settings where time-critical decisions are routine. Yet, numerous studies have revealed significant barriers in interprofessional handovers between nurses and paramedics, ranging from structural communication deficits to role ambiguity and organizational culture [1, 2]. In a comprehensive review, Cohen and Hilligoss (2010) emphasized that hospital handoff practices remain highly variable, fragmented, and inadequately standardized, resulting in information gaps that can compromise the quality of care [2]. This issue is exacerbated in resource-constrained and high-stakes environments such as emergency departments, where rapid patient turnover demands seamless coordination [1]. Structured handover frameworks, particularly the SBAR (Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation) tool, have been widely recognized as practical interventions for improving communication clarity and consistency. Abdollahi et al., (2022) demonstrated that integrating SBAR into emergency department workflows significantly increased both patient and nurse satisfaction [3]. At the same time, Ghonem and El-Husany (2023) reported that SBAR training enhanced nurses’ knowledge, communication confidence, and handoff efficiency [4]. However, despite their efficacy, these tools are inconsistently implemented across settings, particularly in low-resource health systems lacking policy mandates or dedicated training programs [3, 4].

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hassan Elmi, A. (2026). Communication handover barriers among nurses and paramedics in emergency care settings: A call for structured interprofessional solutions. Journal of Nursing Reports in Clinical Practice, 4(1), 63–65. https://doi.org/10.32598/jnrcp.2505.1275

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free