Development of the Huddle Observation Tool for structured case management discussions to improve situation awareness on inpatient clinical wards

Julian Edbrooke-Childs, Jacqueline Hayes, Evelyn Sharples, Dawid Gondek, Emily Stapley, Nick Sevdalis, Peter Lachman, Jessica Deighton, Julian Edbrooke-Childs, Jacqueline Hayes, Evelyn Sharples, Dawid Gondek, Emily Stapley, Nick Sevdalis, Peter Lachman, Jessica Deighton

Abstract

Background: 'Situation Awareness For Everyone' (SAFE) was a 3-year project which aimed to improve situation awareness in clinical teams in order to detect potential deterioration and other potential risks to children on hospital wards. The key intervention was the 'huddle', a structured case management discussion which is central to facilitating situation awareness. This study aimed to develop an observational assessment tool to assess the team processes occurring during huddles, including the effectiveness of the huddle.

Methods: A cross-sectional observational design was used to psychometrically develop the 'Huddle Observation Tool' (HOT) over three phases using standardised psychometric methodology. Huddles were observed across four NHS paediatric wards participating in SAFE by five researchers; two wards within specialist children hospitals and two within district general hospitals, with location, number of beds and length of stay considered to make the sample as heterogeneous as possible. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using the weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results: Inter-rater reliability was acceptable for the collaborative culture (weighted kappa=0.32, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.42), environment items (weighted kappa=0.78, 95% CI 0.52 to 1) and total score (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.87, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95). It was lower for the structure and risk management items, suggesting that these were more variable in how observers rated them. However, agreement on the global score for huddles was acceptable.

Conclusion: We developed an observational assessment tool to assess the team processes occurring during huddles, including the effectiveness of the huddle. Future research should examine whether observational evaluations of huddles are associated with other indicators of safety on clinical wards (eg, safety climate and incidents of patient harm), and whether scores on the HOT are associated with improved situation awareness and reductions in deterioration and adverse events in clinical settings, such as inpatient wards.

Keywords: healthcare quality improvement; patient safety; safety culture.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary of phases of development.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Huddle Observation Tool.

References

    1. Wolfe I, Cass H, Thompson MJ, et al. . Improving child health services in the UK: insights from Europe and their implications for the NHS reforms. BMJ 2011;342:d1277 10.1136/bmj.d1277
    1. Wolfe IN, Macfarlane AL, Donkin AN, et al. . Why children die: death in infants, children and young people in the UK Part A: Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, 2014.
    1. van Galen LS, Struik PW, Driesen BE, et al. . Delayed Recognition of Deterioration of Patients in General Wards Is Mostly Caused by Human Related Monitoring Failures: A Root Cause Analysis of Unplanned ICU Admissions. PLoS One 2016;11:e0161393 10.1371/journal.pone.0161393
    1. Berwick D. A promise to learn - a committment to act: Improving the safety of patient in England. London: Department of Heath, 2013.
    1. Batalden PB, Davidoff F. What is ‘quality improvement’ and how can it transform healthcare? Qual Saf Health Care 2007;16:2–3. 10.1136/qshc.2006.022046
    1. Taylor-Adams S, Vincent CA. Human factors approaches to the analysis of serious incidents safety in medicine: Elsevier, 2000.
    1. Lachman P. Redefining the clinical gaze. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:888–90. 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002322
    1. Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). The National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON). New York: IEE, 1988.
    1. Brady PW, Muething S, Kotagal U, et al. . Improving situation awareness to reduce unrecognized clinical deterioration and serious safety events. Pediatrics 2013;131:e298–e308. 10.1542/peds.2012-1364
    1. Goldenhar LM, Brady PW, Sutcliffe KM, et al. . Huddling for high reliability and situation awareness. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:899–906. 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001467
    1. Carroll C, Patterson M, Wood S, et al. . A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implement Sci 2007;2:40 10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. . Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:806–8. 10.1136/
    1. Flowerdew L, Gaunt A, Spedding J, et al. . A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. Emerg Med J 2013;30:437–43. 10.1136/emermed-2012-201237
    1. Nagpal K, Abboudi M, Fischler L, et al. . Evaluation of postoperative handover using a tool to assess information transfer and teamwork. Ann Surg 2011;253:831–7. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318211d849
    1. Russ S, Hull L, Rout S, et al. . Observational teamwork assessment for surgery. Ann Surg 2012;255:804–9. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824a9a02
    1. Walker S, Brett S, McKay A, et al. . Observational Skill-based Clincial Assessment tool for Resuscitation (OSCAR): Development and validation. Resuscitation 2011;82:835–44. 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.03.009
    1. Deighton J, Edbrooke-Childs J, Stapley E, et al. . Redirecting the clinical gaze on pediatric wards to improve safey outcomes and ensure Situation Awareness for Eveyone (SAFE): A multi-method realistic evaluation evaluation protocol. BMJ Open 2016;6:e014014.
    1. IBM SPSS Statistics for Window [program]. 21.0 version. Armonk, NY: IBM, 2012.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. . Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:34–42. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988.
    1. Sacks H. Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.
    1. Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, et al. . Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 2012;21:651–7. 10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit