Use of huddles among frontline staff in clinical settings: a scoping review protocol.

Camilla B Pimentel, Christine W Hartmann, Daniel Okyere, Sarah L Carnes, Julia R Loup, Tatiana M Vallejo-Luces, Sharon N Sloup, A Lynn Snow
{"title":"Use of huddles among frontline staff in clinical settings: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Camilla B Pimentel, Christine W Hartmann, Daniel Okyere, Sarah L Carnes, Julia R Loup, Tatiana M Vallejo-Luces, Sharon N Sloup, A Lynn Snow","doi":"10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the current evidence on huddles in healthcare settings involving frontline staff.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Team-based models are gaining prominence as the preferred method for delivering coordinated, cost-effective, high-quality health care. Huddles are a powerful method for building relationships among frontline staff members. Currently, no reviews have described huddles used among frontline staff in clinical settings. There is therefore a need to identify gaps in the literature on evidence informing this practice for a greater understanding of the resources available for frontline staff to implement huddles.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This scoping review will consider qualitative studies, experimental and quasi-experimental studies, analytic observational studies and descriptive cross-sectional studies that explore the use of frontline staff huddles to improve quality of care in a clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An initial limited search of PubMed and CINAHL Plus with Full Text will be performed, followed by analysis of the title, abstract and MeSH used to describe the article. Second, searches of PubMed, EBSCOhost and ProQuest will be conducted, followed by searches in reference lists of all articles that meet the inclusion criteria. Studies published in English from inception to the present will be considered. Retrieved papers will be screened for inclusion by at least two reviewers. Data will be extracted and presented in tabular form and a narrative summary that align with the review's objective.</p>","PeriodicalId":73539,"journal":{"name":"JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports","volume":"22 1","pages":"146-153"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the current evidence on huddles in healthcare settings involving frontline staff.

Introduction: Team-based models are gaining prominence as the preferred method for delivering coordinated, cost-effective, high-quality health care. Huddles are a powerful method for building relationships among frontline staff members. Currently, no reviews have described huddles used among frontline staff in clinical settings. There is therefore a need to identify gaps in the literature on evidence informing this practice for a greater understanding of the resources available for frontline staff to implement huddles.

Inclusion criteria: This scoping review will consider qualitative studies, experimental and quasi-experimental studies, analytic observational studies and descriptive cross-sectional studies that explore the use of frontline staff huddles to improve quality of care in a clinical setting.

Methods: An initial limited search of PubMed and CINAHL Plus with Full Text will be performed, followed by analysis of the title, abstract and MeSH used to describe the article. Second, searches of PubMed, EBSCOhost and ProQuest will be conducted, followed by searches in reference lists of all articles that meet the inclusion criteria. Studies published in English from inception to the present will be considered. Retrieved papers will be screened for inclusion by at least two reviewers. Data will be extracted and presented in tabular form and a narrative summary that align with the review's objective.

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
临床环境中一线工作人员开会的使用:范围审查协议。
目的:本综述的目的是提供当前的证据,在卫生保健机构的秘密会议涉及一线工作人员的概述。以团队为基础的模式作为提供协调的、具有成本效益的、高质量的卫生保健的首选方法正日益突出。开会是在一线员工之间建立关系的有力方法。目前,没有评论描述在临床环境中一线工作人员使用的会议。因此,有必要确定关于这种做法的证据文献中的空白,以便更好地了解一线工作人员实施会议的可用资源。纳入标准本范围综述将考虑定性研究、实验和准实验研究、分析性观察研究和描述性横断面研究,这些研究探讨了在临床环境中使用一线员工会议来提高护理质量。方法对PubMed和CINAHL Plus全文进行初步有限检索,然后对标题、摘要文本和描述文章的MeSH进行分析。其次,检索PubMed、EBSCOhost和ProQuest,检索所有符合纳入标准的文章的参考文献列表。从开始到现在用英语发表的研究将被考虑。检索到的论文将由至少两名审稿人筛选纳入。数据将被提取并以表格形式和符合审查目标的叙述性摘要呈现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Admission and discharge criteria for adolescents requiring inpatient or residential mental health care: a scoping review. Adult patient and/or carer experiences of planning for hospital discharge after major trauma: a qualitative systematic review protocol. Private food safety standards in the global food supply chain: a scoping review protocol. Theories of learning and teaching methods used in postgraduate education in the health sciences: a scoping review. Advanced practice nurse professional advancement programs: a scoping review protocol.
×
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