41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    2
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness of the Medical Emergency Team: the importance of dose

      research-article
      1 , , 1 , 2
      Critical Care
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Up to 17% of hospital admissions are complicated by serious adverse events unrelated to the patients presenting medical condition. Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) review patients during early phase of deterioration to reduce patient morbidity and mortality. However, reports of the efficacy of these teams are varied. The aims of this article were to explore the concept of RRT dose, to assess whether RRT dose improves patient outcomes, and to assess whether there is evidence that inclusion of a physician in the team impacts on the effectiveness of the team. A review of available literature suggested that the method of reporting RRT utilization rate, (RRT dose) is calls per 1,000 admissions. Hospitals with mature RRTs that report improved patient outcome following RRT introduction have a RRT dose between 25.8 and 56.4 calls per 1,000 admissions. Four studies report an association between increasing RRT dose and reduced in-hospital cardiac arrest rates. Another reported that increasing RRT dose reduced in-hospital mortality for surgical but not medical patients. The MERIT study investigators reported a negative relationship between MET-like activity and the incidence of serious adverse events. Fourteen studies reported improved patient outcome in association with the introduction of a RRT, and 13/14 involved a Physician-led MET. These findings suggest that if the RRT is the major method for reviewing serious adverse events, the dose of RRT activation must be sufficient for the frequency and severity of the problem it is intended to treat. If the RRT dose is too low then it is unlikely to improve patient outcomes. Increasing RRT dose appears to be associated with reduction in cardiac arrests. The majority of studies reporting improved patient outcome in association with the introduction of an RRT involve a MET, suggesting that inclusion of a physician in the team is an important determinant of its effectiveness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Nurse-staffing levels and the quality of care in hospitals.

          It is uncertain whether lower levels of staffing by nurses at hospitals are associated with an increased risk that patients will have complications or die. We used administrative data from 1997 for 799 hospitals in 11 states (covering 5,075,969 discharges of medical patients and 1,104,659 discharges of surgical patients) to examine the relation between the amount of care provided by nurses at the hospital and patients' outcomes. We conducted regression analyses in which we controlled for patients' risk of adverse outcomes, differences in the nursing care needed for each hospital's patients, and other variables. The mean number of hours of nursing care per patient-day was 11.4, of which 7.8 hours were provided by registered nurses, 1.2 hours by licensed practical nurses, and 2.4 hours by nurses' aides. Among medical patients, a higher proportion of hours of care per day provided by registered nurses and a greater absolute number of hours of care per day provided by registered nurses were associated with a shorter length of stay (P=0.01 and P<0.001, respectively) and lower rates of both urinary tract infections (P<0.001 and P=0.003, respectively) and upper gastrointestinal bleeding (P=0.03 and P=0.007, respectively). A higher proportion of hours of care provided by registered nurses was also associated with lower rates of pneumonia (P=0.001), shock or cardiac arrest (P=0.007), and "failure to rescue," which was defined as death from pneumonia, shock or cardiac arrest, upper gastrointestinal bleeding, sepsis, or deep venous thrombosis (P=0.05). Among surgical patients, a higher proportion of care provided by registered nurses was associated with lower rates of urinary tract infections (P=0.04), and a greater number of hours of care per day provided by registered nurses was associated with lower rates of "failure to rescue" (P=0.008). We found no associations between increased levels of staffing by registered nurses and the rate of in-hospital death or between increased staffing by licensed practical nurses or nurses' aides and the rate of adverse outcomes. A higher proportion of hours of nursing care provided by registered nurses and a greater number of hours of care by registered nurses per day are associated with better care for hospitalized patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado.

            The ongoing debate on the incidence and types of iatrogenic injuries in American hospitals has been informed primarily by the Harvard Medical Practice Study, which analyzed hospitalizations in New York in 1984. The generalizability of these findings is unknown and has been questioned by other studies. We used methods similar to the Harvard Medical Practice Study to estimate the incidence and types of adverse events and negligent adverse events in Utah and Colorado in 1992. We selected a representative sample of hospitals from Utah and Colorado and then randomly sampled 15,000 nonpsychiatric 1992 discharges. Each record was screened by a trained nurse-reviewer for 1 of 18 criteria associated with adverse events. If > or =1 criteria were present, the record was reviewed by a trained physician to determine whether an adverse event or negligent adverse event occurred and to classify the type of adverse event. The measures were adverse events and negligent adverse events. Adverse events occurred in 2.9+/-0.2% (mean+/-SD) of hospitalizations in each state. In Utah, 32.6+/-4% of adverse events were due to negligence; in Colorado, 27.4+/-2.4%. Death occurred in 6.6+/-1.2% of adverse events and 8.8+/-2.5% of negligent adverse events. Operative adverse events comprised 44.9% of all adverse events; 16.9% were negligent, and 16.6% resulted in permanent disability. Adverse drug events were the leading cause of nonoperative adverse events (19.3% of all adverse events; 35.1% were negligent, and 9.7% caused permanent disability). Most adverse events were attributed to surgeons (46.1%, 22.3% negligent) and internists (23.2%, 44.9% negligent). The incidence and types of adverse events in Utah and Colorado in 1992 were similar to those in New York State in 1984. Iatrogenic injury continues to be a significant public health problem. Improving systems of surgical care and drug delivery could substantially reduce the burden of iatrogenic injury.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Findings of the first consensus conference on medical emergency teams.

              Studies have established that physiologic instability and services mismatching precede adverse events in hospitalized patients. In response to these considerations, the concept of a Rapid Response System (RRS) has emerged. The responding team is commonly known as a medical emergency team (MET), rapid response team (RRT), or critical care outreach (CCO). Studies show that an RRS may improve outcome, but questions remain regarding the benefit, design elements, and advisability of implementing a MET system. In June 2005 an International Conference on Medical Emergency Teams (ICMET) included experts in patient safety, hospital medicine, critical care medicine, and METs. Seven of 25 had no experience with an RRS, and the remainder had experience with one of the three major forms of RRS. After preconference telephone and e-mail conversations by the panelists in which questions to be discussed were characterized, literature reviewed, and preliminary answers created, the panelists convened for 2 days to create a consensus document. Four major content areas were addressed: What is a MET response? Is there a MET syndrome? What are barriers to METS? How should outcome be measured? Panelists considered whether all hospitals should implement an RRS. Patients needing an RRS intervention are suddenly critically ill and have a mismatch of resources to needs. Hospitals should implement an RRS, which consists of four elements: an afferent, "crisis detection" and "response triggering" mechanism; an efferent, predetermined rapid response team; a governance/administrative structure to supply and organize resources; and a mechanism to evaluate crisis antecedents and promote hospital process improvement to prevent future events.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2009
                6 October 2009
                : 13
                : 5
                : 313
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Studley Road, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
                [2 ]West Penn Allegheny Health System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
                Article
                cc7996
                10.1186/cc7996
                2784340
                19825203
                2f21cb7a-0f52-4742-8124-a71b29020696
                Copyright ©2009 BioMed Central Ltd
                History
                Categories
                Viewpoint

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                Emergency medicine & Trauma

                Comments

                Comment on this article