BACKGROUND: Safety huddles, brief interdisciplinary meetings aimed at proactive risk mitigation, are increasingly adopted in healthcare to enhance communication and patient safety. Despite their recognized benefits, inconsistent definitions, variable implementation, and conceptual ambiguity persist, hindering standardization and scalability. This study clarifies the concept of "safety huddle" through a rigorous concept analysis.
METHODS: Rodgers and Knafl's evolutionary concept analysis methodology was applied. A systematic search of CINAHL, Medline, and PubMed (2013-January 2025) identified 32 relevant studies. Data were analyzed to delineate core attributes, antecedents, consequences, and contextual variations of safety huddles.
RESULTS: Five core attributes emerged: (1) structured communication (e.g., SBAR, checklists), (2) interdisciplinary collaboration, (3) time-bound, goal-oriented design, (4) proactive risk prediction, and (5) contextual adaptability. Key antecedents included leadership support, psychological safety, and dedicated resources. Consequences encompassed enhanced teamwork, situational awareness, and safety culture. Contextual variations revealed adaptability across settings (e.g., maternity care, ICUs), though and inconsistent participation posed challenges.
CONCLUSIONS: Safety huddles are a dynamic, multifaceted intervention with significant potential to reduce medical errors and foster collaborative safety practices. However, conceptual inconsistencies and methodological gaps limit generalizability. Future efforts should prioritize standardized yet flexible frameworks, leadership training, and policy reforms to optimize huddle efficacy. This analysis provides a foundational model for advancing research, education, and practice in patient safety.
