The current work flow within a large urban intensive care unit is prone to communication errors that can result in less than optimal patient care. This article discusses several cases that highlight breakdowns in communication that potentially lead to adverse events. The article also discusses recommendations to minimize these potential errors by altering the current structure of care in the intensive care unit.
Horvitz-LennonMKilbourneAMPincusHA. From silos to bridges: meeting the general health care needs of adults with severe mental illnesses. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;24:659-669.
3.
MannL. From “silos” to seamless healthcare: bringing hospitals and GPs back together again. Med J Aust. 2005;182:34-37.
4.
CurtisJRShannonSE. Transcending the silos: toward an interdisciplinary approach to end-of-life care in the ICU. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:15-17.
5.
PronovostPBerenholtzSDormanTLipsettPASimmondsTHaradenC. Improving communication in the ICU using daily goals. J Crit Care. 2003;18:71-75.
6.
Lundgrén-LaineHKontioEPerttiläJKorvenrantaHForsströmJSalanteräS. Managing daily intensive care activities: an observational study concerning ad hoc decision making of charge nurses and intensivists. Crit Care. 2011;15:R188.
7.
ReaderTWFlinRMearnsKCuthbertsonBH. Developing a team performance framework for the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1787-1793.
8.
ReddyMCSpencePR. Collaborative information seeking: a field study of a multidisciplinary patient care team. Inform Process Manag. 2008;44:242-255.
9.
MoormanDW. Communication, teams, and medical mistakes. Ann Surg. 2007;245:173-175.
10.
BakerSDarinMLateefO. Multidisciplinary morbidity and mortality conferences: improving patient safety by modifying a medical tradition. Jt Comm Perspect Patient Saf. 2010;10(2):8-10.
