Clinical status: a daily forum for resident discussion and staff education

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

BACKGROUND

Brief, 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

Of 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/ ).

Morning conferences for anaesthesiologists - to be or not to be?

BACKGROUND

The main objectives of this study were to clarify the contents of and attitudes to morning conferences for physicians at Swedish departments of anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine.

METHODS

A prospective cross-sectional three-part study was carried out. Heads of departments responded to a national survey on the structure and content of morning conferences. A questionnaire on attitudes to and general contents of morning conferences was filled out by anaesthesiologists in the Scania region in southern Sweden. Furthermore, telephone interviews were made with anaesthesiologists on primary night call in the Scania region to obtain information on whether their needs to report had been met and on how the conferences had actually been carried out and attended by the physicians.

RESULTS

Information was obtained from 52 departmental heads (80%), 113 anaesthesiologists (53%), and 83 physicians on primary call (92%). Issues most frequently brought up were reports from physicians on night call, discussions of clinical matters, issues of staffing, and organizational matters. Daily morning conferences were strongly favoured for intercollegial solidarity and contacts, and were mainly and regularly used for reports from physicians on night call. At 95% of them, physicians on night call considered themselves to have been allowed to report what they wanted or needed to.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily morning conferences enable regular exchange of information and professional experience, and are considered by Swedish anaesthesiologists to be most valuable for intercollegial solidarity and contacts. Before changes are being made in frequency or duration of morning conferences, their actual structure and content should be carefully evaluated and critically challenged to fit specific needs of that individual department.

Morning report: is the time ripe for a change?

BACKGROUND

Morning report is a time-honored part of the medical day. However, recent changes in house officer training and staffing raise questions about the educational efficacy of this daily conference.

SUMMARY

As it is currently conducted, Morning Report is an exercise in role playing that fails to achieve its main teaching objectives. This article suggests ways to modify Morning Report in an attempt to sustain the valuable purpose for which it was initially conceived.

CONCLUSIONS

Refocusing the objectives of Morning Report and shifting the time to noon may restore the educational value of this important conference.