BACKGROUND: Studies show that implementing huddles in healthcare can improve a variety of outcomes. Yet little is known about the mechanisms through which huddles exert their effects. To help remedy this gap, our study objectives were to explore hospital administrator and frontline staff perspectives on the benefits and challenges of implementing a tiered huddle system; and propose a model based on our findings depicting the mediating pathways through which implementing a huddle system may reduce patient harm. METHODS: Using qualitative methods, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups to obtain a deeper understanding of the huddle system and its outcomes as implemented in an academic tertiary care children's hospital with 539 inpatient beds. We recruited healthcare providers representing all levels using a snowball sampling technique (10 interviews), and emails, flyers, and paper invitations (six focus groups). We transcribed recordings and analysed the data using established techniques. RESULTS: Five themes emerged and provided the foundational constructs of our model. Specifically we propose that huddle implementation leads to improved efficiencies and quality of information sharing, increased levels of accountability, empowerment, and sense of community, which together create a culture of collaboration and collegiality that increases the staff's quality of collective awareness and enhanced capacity for eliminating patient harm. CONCLUSIONS: While each construct in the proposed model is itself a beneficial outcome of implementing huddles, conceptualising the pathways by which they may work allows us to design ways to evaluate other huddle implementation efforts designed to help reduce failures and eliminate patient harm.
BACKGROUND: Studies show that implementing huddles in healthcare can improve a variety of outcomes. Yet little is known about the mechanisms through which huddles exert their effects. To help remedy this gap, our study objectives were to explore hospital administrator and frontline staff perspectives on the benefits and challenges of implementing a tiered huddle system; and propose a model based on our findings depicting the mediating pathways through which implementing a huddle system may reduce patient harm. METHODS: Using qualitative methods, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups to obtain a deeper understanding of the huddle system and its outcomes as implemented in an academic tertiary care children's hospital with 539 inpatient beds. We recruited healthcare providers representing all levels using a snowball sampling technique (10 interviews), and emails, flyers, and paper invitations (six focus groups). We transcribed recordings and analysed the data using established techniques. RESULTS: Five themes emerged and provided the foundational constructs of our model. Specifically we propose that huddle implementation leads to improved efficiencies and quality of information sharing, increased levels of accountability, empowerment, and sense of community, which together create a culture of collaboration and collegiality that increases the staff's quality of collective awareness and enhanced capacity for eliminating patient harm. CONCLUSIONS: While each construct in the proposed model is itself a beneficial outcome of implementing huddles, conceptualising the pathways by which they may work allows us to design ways to evaluate other huddle implementation efforts designed to help reduce failures and eliminate patient harm.
Authors: Martin A Makary; Arnab Mukherjee; J Bryan Sexton; Dora Syin; Emmanuelle Goodrich; Emily Hartmann; Lisa Rowen; Drew C Behrens; Michael Marohn; Peter J Pronovost Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2006-12-08 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Peter J Pronovost; Sean M Berenholtz; Christine A Goeschel; Dale M Needham; J Bryan Sexton; David A Thompson; Lisa H Lubomski; Jill A Marsteller; Martin A Makary; Elizabeth Hunt Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Stephen E Muething; Anthony Goudie; Pamela J Schoettker; Lane F Donnelly; Martha A Goodfriend; Tracey M Bracke; Patrick W Brady; Derek S Wheeler; James M Anderson; Uma R Kotagal Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-07-16 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Patrick W Brady; Stephen Muething; Uma Kotagal; Marshall Ashby; Regan Gallagher; Dawn Hall; Marty Goodfriend; Christine White; Tracey M Bracke; Victoria DeCastro; Maria Geiser; Jodi Simon; Karen M Tucker; Jason Olivea; Patrick H Conway; Derek S Wheeler Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Lawrence B Marks; Marianne Jackson; Liyi Xie; Sha X Chang; Katharin Deschesne Burkhardt; Lukasz Mazur; Ellen L Jones; Patricia Saponaro; Dana Lachapelle; Dee C Baynes; Robert D Adams Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2011-01-14
Authors: Christopher P Landrigan; Gareth J Parry; Catherine B Bones; Andrew D Hackbarth; Donald A Goldmann; Paul J Sharek Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Maya Dewan; Naveen Muthu; Eric Shelov; Christopher P Bonafide; Patrick Brady; Daniela Davis; Eric S Kirkendall; Dana Niles; Robert M Sutton; Danielle Traynor; Ken Tegtmeyer; Vinay Nadkarni; Heather Wolfe Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Sarah E Mossburg; Sallie J Weaver; MarieSarah Pillari; Elizabeth Daugherty Biddison Journal: J Nurs Care Qual Date: 2019 Jul/Sep Impact factor: 1.597
Authors: Michelle W Parker; Matthew Carroll; Benjamin Bolser; Janelle Ballinger; John Brewington; Suzanne Campanella; Andrew Davis-Sandfoss; Karen Tucker; Patrick W Brady Journal: Hosp Pediatr Date: 2017-09
Authors: Blaise T Soberano; Patrick Brady; Toni Yunger; Rhonda Jones; Erin Stoneman; Tina Sosa; Erika L Stalets; Matthew Zackoff; Ranjit Chima; Ken Tegtmeyer; Maya Dewan Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 2.960