Huddles for unprofessional behaviours in the healthcare setting that may require immediate investigation, inquiry or intervention
Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Some unprofessional behaviours, including allegations of discrimination, hostile work environment, violent behaviour, sexual boundary violations, potentially impaired clinicians, professional integrity and retaliation, require healthcare organisations to have a timely and reliable process to guide investigation, inquiry and/or interventions. Failure to have a consistent approach creates extraordinary risk for organisations, their team members and their patients. METHODS: Descriptive study of five health systems that participate in a national professionalism collaborative through the Vanderbilt Health Center for Patient and Professional Advocacy (CPPA) and implemented a huddle process to guide the initial disposition of event reports describing unprofessional behaviours that might warrant investigation, inquiry or intervention. Each site applied lessons learnt over the study period to refine the huddle participants, the process for the huddle and the tracking of information based on their experience. RESULTS: During the study, the participating sites held 219 huddles, which represented <1% of reports processed by CPPA during the study period. The most common type of reports resulting in a huddle included allegations of discrimination (30% of huddles) or hostile work environment (29%). Other common reasons for huddles included violent or aggressive behaviour (15%) or potential sexual boundary violations (13%). Additional reasons for huddles included concerns for an impaired clinician (3%), integrity (2%) or retaliation against a reporter for a previous electronic safety event report (2%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a huddle to review and guide next steps for reports including allegations of serious behaviours provided the healthcare organisations a process to reduce the variability of response to such reports and fostered increased communication and trust among organisational key stakeholders.
Source: BMJ Leader
Authors: Cynthia A Baldwin, Thomas F Catron, Gerald B Hickson, Scott Aberson, Rebecca M Anderson, Sandy Bledsoe, Michael Brodman, Jeremy Cauwels, Roger Dmochowski, Thomas Hemmen, Brian Hoenerman, Rochelle Johnson, Sonam Kapoor, Daniel Lee, Dustin Lillie, Kristen Mekeel, Steven Meranze, Diane Moate, William Perry, Shira L Robbins, Thomas J Savides, Brijen J Shah, Kimberly Thillman, Craig Uthe, Christian Tomaszewski, Britney Wade, Lynn Webb, William O Cooper
Language: English
Subfield: Sociology and Political Science
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W4409798769