Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33559062›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2021

Huddles and their effectiveness at the frontlines of clinical care: a scoping review.

Camilla B Pimentel, A Lynn Snow, Sarah L Carnes, Nishant R Shah, Julia R Loup, Tatiana M Vallejo-Luces, Caroline Madrigal, Christine W Hartmann

Open access · bronzeAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
20.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effect of digital tools to promote hospital quality and safety on adverse events after discharge.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Empowering Culture Change and Safety on the Journey to Zero Harm With Huddle Cards.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Role of High Reliability Organization Foundational Practices in Building a Culture of Safety.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Camilla B PimentelCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research and the New England Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA. Camilla.Pimentel@va.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-2129-682X
A Lynn SnowAlabama Research Institute on Aging and the Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Sarah L CarnesVA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
Nishant R ShahDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Brown University Alpert Medical School, Providence, RI, USA.
Julia R LoupAlabama Research Institute on Aging and the Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Tatiana M Vallejo-LucesDepartment of Clinical and Health Psychology, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Caroline MadrigalCenter of Innovation in Long Term Services and Supports, Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA.
Christine W HartmannCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research and the New England Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
University of Alabama · USBrown University · USProvidence VA Medical Center · USUniversity of Florida Health · USUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · USUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell · USVA New England Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrief, stand-up meetings known as huddles may improve clinical care, but knowledge about huddle implementation and effectiveness at the frontlines is fragmented and setting specific. This work provides a comprehensive overview of huddles used in diverse health care settings, examines the empirical support for huddle effectiveness, and identifies knowledge gaps and opportunities for future research.

methodsA scoping review was completed by searching the databases PubMed, EBSCOhost, ProQuest, and OvidSP for studies published in English from inception to May 31, 2019. Eligible studies described huddles that (1) took place in a clinical or medical setting providing health care patient services, (2) included frontline staff members, (3) were used to improve care quality, and (4) were studied empirically. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts; seven reviewers independently abstracted data from full texts.

resultsOf 2,185 identified studies, 158 met inclusion criteria. The majority (67.7%) of studies described huddles used to improve team communication, collaboration, and/or coordination. Huddles positively impacted team process outcomes in 67.7% of studies, including improvements in efficiency, process-based functioning, and communication across clinical roles (64.4%); situational awareness and staff perceptions of safety and safety climate (44.6%); and staff satisfaction and engagement (29.7%). Almost half of studies (44.3%) reported huddles positively impacting clinical care outcomes such as patients receiving timely and/or evidence-based assessments and care (31.4%); decreased medical errors and adverse drug events (24.3%); and decreased rates of other negative outcomes (20.0%). DISCUSSION: Huddles involving frontline staff are an increasingly prevalent practice across diverse health care settings. Huddles are generally interdisciplinary and aimed at improving team communication, collaboration, and/or coordination. Data from the scoping review point to the effectiveness of huddles at improving work and team process outcomes and indicate the positive impact of huddles can extend beyond processes to include improvements in clinical outcomes. STUDY REGISTRATION: This scoping review was registered with the Open Science Framework on 18 January 2019 ( https://osf.io/bdj2x/ ).

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareQuality of Health CareAwarenessCommunicationHealth ServicesHumanscommunicationcooperative behaviorgroup processespatient care teamsquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID33559062
PMCPMC8390736
OpenAlexW3127586556

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.