The impact of post-fall huddles on repeat fall rates and perceptions of safety culture: a quasi-experimental evaluation of a patient safety demonstration project
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Conducting post-fall huddles is considered an integral component of a fall-risk-reduction program. However, there is no evidence linking post-fall huddles to patient outcomes or perceptions of teamwork and safety culture. The purpose of this study is to determine associations between conducting post-fall huddles and repeat fall rates and between post-fall huddle participation and perceptions of teamwork and safety culture. METHODS: During a two-year demonstration project, we developed a system for 16 small rural hospitals to report, benchmark, and learn from fall events, and we trained them to conduct post-fall huddles. To calculate a hospital's repeat fall rate, we divided the total number of falls reported by the hospital by the number of unique medical record numbers associated with each fall. We used Spearman correlations with exact P values to determine the association between the proportion of falls followed by a huddle and the repeat fall rate. At study end, we used the TeamSTEPPS® Teamwork Perceptions Questionnaire (T-TPQ) to assess perceptions of teamwork support for fall-risk reduction and the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) to assess perceptions of safety culture. We added an item to the T-TPQ for respondents to indicate the number of post-fall huddles in which they had participated. We used a binary logistic regression with a logit link to examine the effect of participation in post-fall huddles on respondent-level percent positive T-TPQ and HSOPS scores. We accounted for clustering of respondents within hospitals with random effects using the GLIMMIX procedure in SAS/STAT. RESULT: Repeat fall rates were negatively associated with the proportion of falls followed by a huddle. As compared to hospital staff who did not participate in huddles, those who participated in huddles had more positive perceptions of four domains of safety culture and how team structure, team leadership, and situation monitoring supported fall-risk reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Post-fall huddles may reduce the risk of repeat falls. Staff who participate in post-fall huddles are likely to have positive perceptions of teamwork support for fall-risk reduction and safety culture because huddles are a team-based approach to reporting, adapting, and learning.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Team STEPPS has been shown to be beneficial in reducing falls in hospitalized patients.
“It has been shown to be beneficial in reducing falls in hospitalized patients (21).”
From Application of zero trust model in preventing medical errors (2024) · cites this paper as [21]
The Results (page unavailable) report a negative association between post-fall huddles and repeat fall rates in 16 hospitals, but the association did not reach conventional statistical significance (p = .07). The Methods say the hospitals had previously implemented strategies consistent with TeamSTEPPS; the study did not establish that TeamSTEPPS itself reduced falls. The Discussion describes the huddle finding as a possible reduction in repeat falls, not a demonstrated reduction in falls generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 64 · Cited by 28
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [8]National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report chartbook on patient safety. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; March 2016. AHRQ Pub. No. 16-0015-2-EF. 35263060
- Authors
- Jones, K. J., Crowe, J., Allen, J. A., Skinner, A. M., High, R., Kennel, V., & Reiter-Palmon, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
- University of Nebraska at Omaha (US)
- Corresponding author
- Jones, Katherine J.
- Venue
- BMC Health Services Research
- Published
- 2019-09-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 650-650
- ISSN
- 1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6734353
- OpenAlex
- W2972382163
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 4.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalCommons@UNO (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1R03HS024630-01, 1R18HS021429-01)
- Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (20871-Y3)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
- Keywords
- patient falls, fall risk reduction, safety culture, teamwork, TeamSTEPPS, rural hospitals, hospital staff perceptions
- MeSH terms
- Accidental Falls, Cross-Sectional Studies, Group Processes, Humans, Inpatients, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Longitudinal Studies, Program Evaluation, Safety Management, Patient Safety
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review