Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41334049›Full record

ArticleInnovation in aging2025

Resident- and family-led huddles for collaborative care planning in long-term care: a feasibility study.

Lisa A Cranley, Linda McGillis Hall, Wendy Duggleby, Shoshana Helfenbaum, Daniel Galessiere, Raquel M Meyer, Gajan Sivakumaran, Danielle Just, Lauren MacEachern, Katherine S McGilton

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovation in aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04026698 (Implementing an Intervention to Foster Meaningful Engagement and Shared Decision-making in Long-term Care), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04026698 nacompletednot on this map

Implementing an Intervention to Foster Meaningful Engagement and Shared Decision-making in Long-term Care: A Mixed Methods Approach

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of TorontoRan2019 to 2023Enrolled110ConditionsQuality of LifeArmsResident and Family Engagement Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Lisa A CranleyLawrence Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3308-7558
Linda McGillis HallLawrence Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Wendy DugglebyFaculty of Nursing, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Shoshana HelfenbaumOntario Centres for Learning, Research and Innovation in Long-Term Care at Baycrest Academy for Research and Education, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Daniel GalessiereSE Health (Saint Elizabeth Health Care), Markham, Ontario, Canada.
Raquel M MeyerPallium Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Gajan SivakumaranSchool of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Danielle JustOntario Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lauren MacEachernDavis Pier, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Katherine S McGiltonLawrence Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2470-9738

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Engaging long-term care residents and families in decisions and as active partners in care can improve the quality of care. However, barriers to effective communication among the care team, residents, and families remain. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction with an intervention to engage residents, their family, and team members in a collaborative approach to care planning to support person- and relationship-centered care. Research Design and Methods: A multi-method approach was utilized. The intervention included: leadership coaching sessions; an education session with team members and leaders for communication skills training; and resident- and family-led care planning conversations (huddles) that included huddle training. Results: The intervention was found to be feasible to implement and was acceptable to participants. The leadership coaching sessions and the huddles could be feasibly conducted in-person or virtually. Participants were satisfied with the leadership coaching and the huddles, and the communication tool was found to be useful. Suggestions were made to further innovate huddles. Discussion and Implications: Huddles provided a structured approach and relational process that facilitated communication among team members, residents, and families. The communication tool provided a common language for discussing resident care. The leadership coaching sessions and huddles were feasible to implement and can be adapted for virtual delivery. Huddles are a promising practice for engaging residents and families in care planning, but further testing is needed. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04026698.

Indexed as

AdvocacyCommunicationFamily engagement

Identifiers

PMID41334049
PMCPMC12667611

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.