Dataset Information

Assessing risks to paediatric patients: conversation analysis of situation awareness in huddle meetings in England.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To analyse the language and conversation used in huddles to gain a deeper understanding of exactly how huddles proceed in practice and to examine the methods by which staff members identify at-risk patients.

Setting

Paediatric wards in four English hospitals, which were part of a 12-hospital cohort participating in the Situation Awareness for Everyone programme. Wards varied by geographical region and type of hospital.

Participants

Paediatric staff on wards in four English hospitals.

Design

Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis of recorded safety huddles.

Methods

This study represents the first analysis of huddle interaction. All huddle meetings taking place on four wards across four different hospitals were audio recorded and transcribed. The research question examined was: how are staff identifying at-risk patients in huddles? The ethnomethodological conversation analytic approach was used to analyse the transcripts.

Results

Huddlers made use of categories that allowed them to efficiently identify patients for each other as needing increased attention. Lexicon included the use of 'no concerns', 'the one to watch', 'watcher' and 'acute concerns'. Huddlers used the meetings to go beyond standardised indicators of risk to identify relative risk and movement in patients towards deterioration, relative to the last huddle meeting and to their usual practices. An implicit category, termed here 'pre-concerns', was used by staff to identify such in-between states. Sequential analysis also highlighted the conversational rights that were held implicitly by staff in different clinical roles.

Conclusion

Practical implications and recommendations for huddlers are considered. These included that for increased situation awareness, it is recommended that all staff are active in the huddle conversation and not only the most senior team members.

SUBMITTER: Hayes J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6537966 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the utility of screening electrocardiograms after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among children in detecting myocarditis related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Study designA retrospective chart review was performed at a large paediatric academic institution to identify patients with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection who received a screening electrocardiogram by their primary care providers and were subsequently referred for outpatient cardiology consultation due to an abnormal electrocardiogram. The outcomes were the results from their cardiology evaluations, including testing and final diagnoses.ResultsAmong 46 patients, during their preceding COVID-19 illness, the majority had mild symptoms, 4 were asymptomatic, and 1 had moderate symptoms. The median length of time from positive SARS-CoV-2 test to screening electrocardiogram was 22 days, and many electrocardiogram findings that prompted cardiology consultation were normal variants in asymptomatic adolescent athletes. Patients underwent frequent additional testing at their cardiology appointments: repeat electrocardiogram (72%), echocardiogram (59%), Holter monitor (11%), exercise stress test (7%), and cardiac MRI (2%). Five patients were incidentally diagnosed with CHD or structural cardiac abnormalities, and three patients had conduction abnormalities (pre-mature atrial contractions, pre-mature ventricular contractions, borderline prolonged QTc), although potentially incidental to COVID-19. No patients were diagnosed with myocarditis or ventricular dysfunction.ConclusionIn a small cohort of children with prior COVID-19, who were primarily either asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, subsequent screening electrocardiograms identified various potential abnormalities prompting cardiology consultation, but no patient was diagnosed with myocarditis. Larger multi-centre studies are necessary to confirm these results and to evaluate those with more severe disease.