Dataset Information

'Code-95' rapid response calls for patients under airborne precautions in the COVID-19-era: a cross-sectional survey of healthcare worker perceptions.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To allow better allocation of staff and resources, rapid response teams attending to acutely deteriorating or aggressive patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were pre-warned with the announcement of 'Code-95' with calls.

Aim

To assess healthcare worker (HCW) perspectives on pre-warning rapid response calls (RRC) with 'Code-95' in announcements when attending to deteriorating or aggressive patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 infection.

Methods

Design: prospective cross-sectional single-centre survey of HCW over a 3-week period.

Setting

tertiary public hospital.

Participants

HCW caring for deteriorating or aggressive patients.

Main outcome measures

the primary outcome was to assess HCW perspectives in attending Code-95 calls. Secondary outcomes were to identify any differences related to craft group, age, experience or presence of comorbidities.

Results

A total of 297 responses was analysed; 86.7% of HCW (n = 257) attending Code-95 calls reported anxiety. Medical staff reported greater anxiety in comparison to nursing staff (93.8% vs 78.5%; P = 0.002). Efferent team reported higher anxiety in contrast to afferent team (92.6% vs 58.8%; P = 0.021). There was no significant difference in perceived anxiety based on age (≤40 vs >40 years of age), years of experience (≤5 vs >5 years), comorbidities or mental illness; 54% reported concerns about adequacy of infection-control policies and personal protective equipment; 45% were worried about inadequate training for responding to Code-95 calls.

Conclusions

Most surveyed HCW supported Code-95 announcements pre-warning them of potential COVID-19 exposure when attending a RRC. However, the majority of HCW reported anxiety when attending these calls. Medical and efferent team HCW perceived greater anxiety compared to nursing and afferent team HCW. The Code-95 system to pre-warn rapid response teams may be a useful addition to protecting HCW from infectious diseases, although broader implementation will require greater resourcing, training and support.

SUBMITTER: Subramaniam A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8251212 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Rapid Response Team (RRT) calls are clinical crises. Clinical and time pressures can hinder effective liaison between staff who call the RRT ('users') and those responding as part of the RRT ('members'). Non-technical skills (NTS) training has been shown to improve communication and cooperation but requires time and financial resources that may not be available in acute care hospitals. Rapid Response System (RRS) re-design, aiming to promote use of NTS, may provide an alternative approach to improving interactions within RRTs and between members and users. METHODS:Re-design of an existing mature RRS was undertaken in a tertiary, metropolitan hospital incorporating the addition of: 1) regular RRT meetings 2) RRT role badges and 3) a structured member-to-user patient care responsibility "hand-off" process. To compare experiences and perceptions of calls, users and members were surveyed pre and post re-design. RESULTS:Post re-design there were improvements in members' understanding of RRT roles (P?=?0.03) and responsibilities (P?<?0.01), and recollection of introducing themselves to users (P?=?0.02). For users, after the re-design, there were improvements in identification of the RRT leader (P?<?0.01), and in the development of clinical plans for patients remaining on the ward at the end of an RRT call (P?<?0.01). However, post-re-design, fewer users agreed that the structured hand-off was useful or that they should be involved in the process. Both members and users reported fewer experiences of conflict at RRT calls post-re-design (both P?<?0.01). CONCLUSION:The RRS re-design yielded improvements in interactions between members in RRTs and between RRT members and users. However, some unintended consequences arose, particularly around user satisfaction with the structured hand-off. These findings suggest that refinement and improvement of the RRS is possible, but should be an ongoing iterative effort, ideally supported by staff training. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT01551160. Registered: 12th March 2012.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough training and education have long been accepted as integral to disaster preparedness, many currently taught practices are neither evidence-based nor standardized. The need for effective evidence-based disaster training of healthcare staff at all levels, including the development of standards and guidelines for training in the multi-disciplinary health response to major events, has been designated by the disaster response community as a high priority. We describe the application of systematic evidence-based consensus building methods to derive educational competencies and objectives in criteria-based preparedness and response relevant to all hospital healthcare workers.MethodsThe conceptual development of cross-cutting competencies incorporated current evidence through a systematic consensus building process with the following steps: (1) review of peer-reviewed literature on relevant content areas and educational theory; (2) structured review of existing competencies, national level courses and published training objectives; (3) synthesis of new cross-cutting competencies; (4) expert panel review; (5) refinement of new competencies and; (6) development of testable terminal objectives for each competency using similar processes covering requisite knowledge, attitudes, and skills.ResultsSeven cross-cutting competencies were developed: (1) Recognize a potential critical event and implement initial actions; (2) Apply the principles of critical event management; (3) Demonstrate critical event safety principles; (4) Understand the institutional emergency operations plan; (5) Demonstrate effective critical event communications; (6) Understand the incident command system and your role in it; (7) Demonstrate the knowledge and skills needed to fulfill your role during a critical event. For each of the cross-cutting competencies, comprehensive terminal objectives are described.ConclusionCross-cutting competencies and objectives developed through a systematic evidence-based consensus building approach may serve as a foundation for future hospital healthcare worker training and education in disaster preparedness and response.