ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
The Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop: Initial Testing and Refinement of a Novel Intervention to Enhance Hospital Incident Reporting and Patient Safety.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05381441 (A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop With an Established Incident Reporting System
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Voluntary incident reporting has improved safety in many high-risk industries, but several barriers have limited its effectiveness in hospitals. Designed to overcome these barriers, the novel Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop: (1) obtains input from nurses about patient safety problems; (2) invites nursing units to select a Target Event to focus on; (3) teaches nurses to write more informative incident reports; (4) prompts nurses to report Target Events for a designated period; (5) standardizes investigative procedures to support mitigation plans; and (6) provides feedback to nurses about contributing factors and mitigation plans. We aimed to refine the SAFE Loop through iterative testing. Methods: This study reflected Stage I of behavioral intervention development. At a large U.S. academic hospital, we first conducted proof-of-concept testing on two nursing units. Leveraging these experiences and stakeholder input, we made iterative refinements to intervention design, implementation, and evaluation plans. Finally, we conducted structured pilot testing of the refined intervention on one nursing unit. While SAFE Loop could be applied to any patient safety problem, we focused on medication safety. Results: In initial proof-of-concept testing, implementation was feasible and nurses voiced substantial enthusiasm. Following the refinements, the structured pilot test reaffirmed SAFE Loop feasibility, including selecting a Target Event, training nurses in enhanced reporting methods, conducting investigative interviews, developing mitigation plans with nursing unit leaders, and distributing mitigation plans on the unit. The pilot also demonstrated the feasibility of extracting contributing factors from incident reports and surveying nurses about reporting and safety. Qualitative interviews after the pilot reaffirmed intervention acceptability. Conclusions: Nurses found the SAFE Loop to be a promising strategy for improving patient safety. Testing and refinements to the SAFE Loop laid the groundwork for efficacy testing via an ongoing pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Number NCT05381441.
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.