Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29244168›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2018

Factors to consider in the introduction of huddles on clinical wards: perceptions of staff on the SAFE programme.

Emily Stapley, Evelyn Sharples, Peter Lachman, Monica Lakhanpaul, Miranda Wolpert, Jessica Deighton

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Reclaiming the systems approach to paediatric safety.Archives of disease in childhood · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily StapleyEvidence Based Practice Unit, Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families and University College London (UCL), London, UK.
Evelyn SharplesEvidence Based Practice Unit, Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families and University College London (UCL), London, UK.
Peter LachmanClinical Lead SAFE, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health London UK, and International Society for Quality in Healthcare (ISQua), Dublin, Ireland.
Monica LakhanpaulUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health and UCL Partners, London, UK.
Miranda WolpertEvidence Based Practice Unit, Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families and University College London (UCL), London, UK.
Jessica DeightonEvidence Based Practice Unit, Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families and University College London (UCL), London, UK.
University College London · GBInternational Society for Quality in Health Care · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore paediatric hospital staff members' perceptions of the emerging benefits and challenges of the huddle, a new safety improvement initiative, as well as the barriers and facilitators to its implementation.

designA qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews to explore staff perspectives and experiences.

settingSituation Awareness For Everyone (SAFE), a safety improvement programme, was implemented on a sample of National Health Service (NHS) paediatric wards from September 2014 to June 2016. Previously untested in England, the huddle was a central component of the programme.

participantsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 76 staff members on four wards ~4 months after the start of the programme.

resultsA thematic analysis showed that staff perceived the huddle as helping to increase their awareness of important issues, improve communication, facilitate teamwork, and encourage a culture of increased efficiency, anticipation and planning on the ward. Challenges of the huddle included added pressure on staff time and workload, and the potential for junior nurses to be excluded from involvement, thus perhaps inadvertently reinforcing medical hierarchies. Staff also identified several barriers and facilitators to the huddle process, including the importance of senior nursing and medical staff leadership and managing staff time and capacity issues.

conclusionsThe findings point towards the potential efficacy of the huddle as a way of improving hospital staff members' working environments and clinical practice, with important implications for other sites seeking to implement such safety improvement initiatives.

Indexed as

AwarenessCommunicationPatient SafetyEfficiency, OrganizationalEnglandFemaleHospitals, PediatricHumansMaleNational Health ProgramsPersonnel, HospitalProgram EvaluationQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID29244168
PMCPMC5890866
OpenAlexW2774033543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.