Dataset Information

Rapid Response and Cardiac Arrest Teams: A Descriptive Analysis of 103 American Hospitals.

ABSTRACT: Despite improvements in the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest over the past decade, in-hospital cardiac arrest continues to be associated with poor prognosis. This has led to the development of rapid response systems, hospital-wide efforts to improve patient outcomes by centering on prompt identification of decompensating patients, expert clinical management, and continuous quality improvement of processes of care. The rapid response system may include cardiac arrest teams, which are centered on identification and treatment of patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. However, few evidence-based guidelines exist to guide the formation of such teams, and the degree of their variation across the United States has not been well described.

Design

Descriptive cross-sectional, internet-based survey.

Setting

Cohort of preidentified clinicians involved in their hospital's adult rapid response system across the United States.

Subjects

Clinicians who had been identified by study team members using personal and professional contacts over a 7-month period from June 2018 to December 2018.

Interventions

An 80-item survey was developed by the investigators. It sought information on the afferent (identification and notification of providers) and efferent (response of providers to patient) limbs of the rapid response system, as well as management of patients post in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Measurements and main results

One-hundred fourteen surveys were distributed. Of these, 109 (96%) were completed. Six were duplicates and were excluded, leaving a total of 103 surveys from 103 hospitals in 30 states. Seventy-six percent of hospitals were academic, 30% were large hospitals (> 750 inpatient beds), and 58% had large ICUs (> 50 ICU beds). We found wide variation in the structure and function in both the afferent and efferent limbs of the rapid response system. The majority of hospitals had a rapid response team and a cardiac arrest team. Most rapid response teams contained a provider, a critical care nurse, and a respiratory therapist. In hospitals with training programs in internal medicine, anesthesia, emergency medicine, or critical care, 45% of rapid response teams and 75% of cardiac arrest teams were led by trainees, with inconsistent attending presence. Targeted temperature management and coronary catheterization were widely used post in-hospital cardiac arrest, but indications varied considerably.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated substantial variation in the structure and function of rapid response systems as well as in management of patients during and after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

SUBMITTER: Mitchell OJL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7063949 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rapid Response and Cardiac Arrest Teams: A Descriptive Analysis of 103 American Hospitals.

Mitchell Oscar J L OJL Motschwiller Caroline W CW Horowitz James M JM Friedman Oren A OA Nichol Graham G Evans Laura E LE Mukherjee Vikramjit V

Critical care explorations 20190807 8

Despite improvements in the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest over the past decade, in-hospital cardiac arrest continues to be associated with poor prognosis. This has led to the development of rapid response systems, hospital-wide efforts to improve patient outcomes by centering on prompt identification of decompensating patients, expert clinical management, and continuous quality improvement of processes of care. The rapid response system may include cardiac arrest teams, which are cent ...[more]

PMID: 32166272

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRapid response teams (RRTs) are foundational to hospital response to deteriorating conditions of patients. However, little is known about differences in RRT organization and function across top-performing and non-top-performing hospitals for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) care.ObjectiveTo evaluate differences in design and implementation of RRTs at top-performing and non-top-performing sites for survival of IHCA, which is known to be associated with hospital performance on IHCA incidence.Design, setting, and participantsA qualitative analysis was performed of data from semistructured interviews of 158 hospital staff members (nurses, physicians, administrators, and staff) during site visits to 9 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation program and consistently ranked in the top, middle, and bottom quartiles for IHCA survival during 2012-2014. Site visits were conducted from April 19, 2016, to July 27, 2017. Data analysis was completed in January 2019.Main outcomes and measuresSemistructured in-depth interviews were performed and thematic analysis was conducted on strategies for IHCA prevention, including RRT roles and responsibilities.ResultsOf the 158 participants, 72 were nurses (45.6%), 27 physicians (17.1%), 27 clinical staff (17.1%), and 32 administrators (20.3%). Between 12 and 30 people at each hospital participated in interviews. Differences in RRTs at top-performing and non-top-performing sites were found in the following 4 domains: team design and composition, RRT engagement in surveillance of at-risk patients, empowerment of bedside nurses to activate the RRT, and collaboration with bedside nurses during and after a rapid response. At top-performing hospitals, RRTs were typically staffed with dedicated team members without competing clinical responsibilities, who provided expertise to bedside nurses in managing patients who were at risk for deterioration, and collaborated with nurses during and after a rapid response. Bedside nurses were empowered to activate RRTs based on their judgment and experience without fear of reprisal from physicians or hospital staff. In contrast, RRT members at non-top-performing hospitals had competing clinical responsibilities and were generally less engaged with bedside nurses. Nurses at non-top-performing hospitals reported concerns about potential consequences from activating the RRT.Conclusions and relevanceThis qualitative study's findings suggest that top-performing hospitals feature RRTs with dedicated staff without competing clinical responsibilities, that work collaboratively with bedside nurses, and that can be activated without fear of reprisal. These findings provide unique insights into RRTs at hospitals with better IHCA outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundHospitals often employ Medical Emergency Teams (METs) to respond to patients with acute physiological decline so as to prevent deaths from in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We determined the frequency of missed opportunities for MET evaluation, defined as no MET evaluation prior to IHCA despite evidence of severe vital sign abnormalities ≥1 hour preceding cardiac arrest.MethodsWithin Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we identified 21,913 patients from 274 hospitals with IHCA on general inpatient or telemetry floors who would be eligible for a MET evaluation prior to IHCA. We determined the proportion of patients with missed opportunities for MET evaluation, defined as no MET evaluation before IHCA despite at least 1 severe vital sign abnormality (pulse >150 or <30, respiratory rate >35 or <8, systolic blood pressure <80, and oxygen saturation <80%) 1, 2, and 4 hours before IHCA. The relationship between a hospital's proportion of missed opportunities for MET evaluation and its risk-standardized rate of survival to discharge for IHCA (derived using hierarchical linear regression models) was then evaluated.ResultsOverall, few (3,814 [17.4%]) patients with IHCA had a preceding MET evaluation, and the odds of a MET evaluation varied by >80% across hospitals (median, 14.6% [interquartile range, 9.1%-22.2%]; median odds ratio, 1.82). Vital sign data were available for 13,115 (72.5%) of the 18,099 patients without MET evaluation. Of these patients, 5,243 (40.0%), 4,078 (31.1%), and 1,767 (13.4%) had at least 1 severe vital sign abnormality ≥1, 2, and 4 hours before IHCA, respectively. Hospitals with the highest proportion of unevaluated patients despite severe vital sign abnormalities 2 and 4 hours preceding cardiac arrest had the lowest IHCA survival rate (correlation of -0.14 [P = .04] and -0.16 [P = .01], respectively).ConclusionsAlthough METs are designed to prevent IHCA, many patients with severe vital sign abnormalities prior to IHCA did not have a MET evaluation, and hospitals with higher rates of unevaluated patients had lower IHCA survival. These findings suggest missed opportunities to efficiently use METs in current practice.

Project description:BackgroundSurvival outcomes following in-hospital cardiac arrest vary significantly across hospitals. Research suggests clinician education and training may play a role. We sought to identify best practices related to the education and training of resuscitation teams.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive qualitative analysis of semistructured interview data obtained from in-depth site visits conducted from 2016 to 2017 at 9 diverse hospitals within the American Heart Association "Get With The Guidelines" registry, selected based on in-hospital cardiac arrest survival performance (5 top-, 1 middle-, 3 low-performing). We assessed coded data related to education and training including systems learning, informal feedback and debrief, and formal learning through advanced cardiopulmonary life support and mock codes. Thematic analysis was used to identify best practices.ResultsIn total, 129 interviews were conducted with a variety of hospital staff including nurses, chaplains, security guards, respiratory therapists, physicians, pharmacists, and administrators, yielding 78 hours and 29 minutes of interview time. Four themes related to training and education were identified: engagement, clear communication, consistency, and responsive leadership. Top-performing hospitals encouraged employee engagement with creative marketing of new programs and prioritizing hands-on learning over passive didactics. Clear communication was accomplished with debriefing, structured institutional review, and continual, frequent education for departments. Consistency was a cornerstone to culture change and was achieved with uniform policies for simulation practice as well as reinforced, routine practice (weekly, monthly, quarterly). Finally, top-performing hospitals had responsive leadership teams across multiple disciplines (nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy and medicine), who listened and adapted programs to fit the needs of their staff.ConclusionsAmong top-performing hospitals excelling in in-hospital cardiac arrest survival, we identified core elements for education and training of resuscitation teams. Developing tools to expand these areas for hospitals may improve in-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes.

Project description:AimsThe goal of this study was to gain insight into the views and experiences of an intensive care team working in a new nursing-care delivery model during the COVID-19 waves. A new model of care was implemented to augment nursing capacity and provide sufficient intensive care beds.DesignA qualitative monocentric study using rapid qualitative descriptive methods was reported in line with the COREQ checklist.MethodsNurse, ward manager and physician participants were purposively recruited between January and March 2021 in a tertiary university-affiliated hospital in the Flemish-speaking part of Belgium. Semistructured interviews were conducted and analysed using thematic analysis methods.ResultsThe participants were seventeen expert nurses, twelve supporting nurses, seven ward managers and four physicians. A central theme of ensuring safe, high-quality care emerged from the findings. There was a sense of losing one's grip on clinical practice when working in the mixed nursing-care teams. Different underlying experiences played a part in this sense of losing control: dealing with unknown elements, experiencing role ambiguity, struggling with responsibility and the absence of trust. Several coping mechanisms were developed by the nursing-care team to deal with those experiences, including attempts to create stability, to strike a balance between delegating and educating, to build in control and to communicate openly.ConclusionIn this rapid qualitative descriptive study, the implementation of a new nursing-care delivery model during a pandemic was seen to lead to several challenges for all members of the care team. Coping mechanisms were developed by the team to deal with these experienced challenges.ImpactWhen rethinking nursing-care delivery models, the findings of this study may help guide the process of implementing mixed nursing-care teams. Special attention needs to be paid to clarifying roles, sharing responsibility and clinical leadership. Other significant influences (such as moral distress) should also be taken into account.

Dataset Information

Rapid Response and Cardiac Arrest Teams: A Descriptive Analysis of 103 American Hospitals.

Design

Setting

Subjects

Interventions

Measurements and main results

Conclusions

Publications

Rapid Response and Cardiac Arrest Teams: A Descriptive Analysis of 103 American Hospitals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets