SynthesisBMC health services research2025
Safety huddle in healthcare settings: a concept analysis.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structured shift huddle training and its influence on nurses' knowledge, safety awareness, and clinical performance: a quasi-experimental investigation.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Leveraging sociological systems theory: integrating transformational leadership and social capital to enhance quality of care - an exploratory longitudinal study of German hospitals.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Preventive Support Strategies for the Second Victim Phenomenon in Nurses: A Mixed-Method Study.International nursing review · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to patient education from nursing perspectives in West bank hospitals: a Cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- A just-in-time huddle to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in high-risk children.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSafety 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.
methodsRodgers 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.
resultsFive 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.
conclusionsSafety 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.