Safety huddle in healthcare settings: a concept analysis.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Health Services Research Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1186/s12913-025-12526-x
Ibrahim Ghoul, Abdullah Abdullah, Fateh Awwad, Latefa Ali Dardas
{"title":"Safety huddle in healthcare settings: a concept analysis.","authors":"Ibrahim Ghoul, Abdullah Abdullah, Fateh Awwad, Latefa Ali Dardas","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-12526-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Safety huddles, brief interdisciplinary meetings aimed at proactive risk mitigation, are increasingly adopted in healthcare to enhance communication and patient safety. Despite their recognized benefits, inconsistent definitions, variable implementation, and conceptual ambiguity persist, hindering standardization and scalability. This study clarifies the concept of \"safety huddle\" through a rigorous concept analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Rodgers and Knafl's evolutionary concept analysis methodology was applied. A systematic search of CINAHL, Medline, and PubMed (2013-January 2025) identified 32 relevant studies. Data were analyzed to delineate core attributes, antecedents, consequences, and contextual variations of safety huddles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five core attributes emerged: (1) structured communication (e.g., SBAR, checklists), (2) interdisciplinary collaboration, (3) time-bound, goal-oriented design, (4) proactive risk prediction, and (5) contextual adaptability. Key antecedents included leadership support, psychological safety, and dedicated resources. Consequences encompassed enhanced teamwork, situational awareness, and safety culture. Contextual variations revealed adaptability across settings (e.g., maternity care, ICUs), though and inconsistent participation posed challenges.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Safety huddles are a dynamic, multifaceted intervention with significant potential to reduce medical errors and foster collaborative safety practices. However, conceptual inconsistencies and methodological gaps limit generalizability. Future efforts should prioritize standardized yet flexible frameworks, leadership training, and policy reforms to optimize huddle efficacy. This analysis provides a foundational model for advancing research, education, and practice in patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"393"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11917008/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12526-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Safety huddles, brief interdisciplinary meetings aimed at proactive risk mitigation, are increasingly adopted in healthcare to enhance communication and patient safety. Despite their recognized benefits, inconsistent definitions, variable implementation, and conceptual ambiguity persist, hindering standardization and scalability. This study clarifies the concept of "safety huddle" through a rigorous concept analysis.

Methods: Rodgers and Knafl's evolutionary concept analysis methodology was applied. A systematic search of CINAHL, Medline, and PubMed (2013-January 2025) identified 32 relevant studies. Data were analyzed to delineate core attributes, antecedents, consequences, and contextual variations of safety huddles.

Results: Five core attributes emerged: (1) structured communication (e.g., SBAR, checklists), (2) interdisciplinary collaboration, (3) time-bound, goal-oriented design, (4) proactive risk prediction, and (5) contextual adaptability. Key antecedents included leadership support, psychological safety, and dedicated resources. Consequences encompassed enhanced teamwork, situational awareness, and safety culture. Contextual variations revealed adaptability across settings (e.g., maternity care, ICUs), though and inconsistent participation posed challenges.

Conclusions: Safety huddles are a dynamic, multifaceted intervention with significant potential to reduce medical errors and foster collaborative safety practices. However, conceptual inconsistencies and methodological gaps limit generalizability. Future efforts should prioritize standardized yet flexible frameworks, leadership training, and policy reforms to optimize huddle efficacy. This analysis provides a foundational model for advancing research, education, and practice in patient safety.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
期刊最新文献
Geriatric assessment in Belgian nursing homes: qualitative insights. Costs of delivering COVID-19 vaccine in Botswana during the height of the pandemic: a retrospective study. Gothenburg very early supported discharge: evaluating differences in costs and environmental impact due to rehabilitation consumption during the first year in patients hospitalized due to mild stroke. Improving hospital food and meal provision: a qualitative exploration of nutrition leaders' experiences in implementing change. Nurses' care coordination competence in mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units: a cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1