Rapid Response Team Activations Within 24 Hours of Admission From the Emergency Department: An Innovative Approach for Performance Improvement

Abstract

Objectives: Performance improvement programs in emergency medicine (EM) have evolved beyond peer reviews of referred cases and now encompass a large set of quality metrics that are measured proactively. However, peer review of cases continues to be an important element of performance improvement, and selection of cases tends to be driven by an ad hoc referral process based on concerns about problems with care in the emergency department (ED). In the past decade, there has been widespread hospital adoption of rapid response teams (RRTs) that respond to patients who decline clinically to reduce adverse outcomes. In an effort to cast a wider net, to take a more systematic approach, and to avoid "blind spots" from individual variability in criteria for referring cases, the institution instituted a new process for selecting cases for ED peer review based on RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED. The hypothesis was that a formal process for review of these activation cases would increase the number of cases for peer review. at an urban, academic medical center with an EM residency program. A new automated monthly report was created, capturing all RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED. All events were reviewed by three physicians from the ED performance improvement committee to examine for systems issues, individual provider issues, or both, that might yield opportunities for improvement. Cases with potential opportunities were reviewed by the full ED performance improvement committee. Cases were classified according to the indication for response team activation using the system outlined by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Results: During the study period 61,814 patients were treated in the ED, and 13,067 were admitted to inpatient status. Thirty-two RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED occurred among these admitted patients, representing 0.24% of admissions (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.16% to 0.33%). Of the 32 cases, only one was also referred independently for ED performance improvement review via the traditional ad hoc process. During the same period of time, 85 cases were referred to the ED performance improvement committee via the traditional ad hoc referral process. Thus, the RRT cases added an additional 31 cases, or 36.5%, to the 85 cases reviewed in ED performance improvement. Of the 32 cases, two were determined by the performance improvement committee to have individual provider factors in their ED care, which contributed to the clinical decline triggering the response teams; none had system factors. Most of the response team activations were for neurologic changes (n = 13) and respiratory status changes (n = 12). In two cases there was long-term morbidity or mortality related to the team activation event; in neither of these cases were ED system or individual provider factors judged to have contributed. Conclusions: The review of RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED significantly supplemented the typical ...

Vital Signs Predict Rapid-Response Team Activation within Twelve Hours of Emergency Department Admission

“… 2 , 10 Lovett et al used 24-hour RRTs as a performance improvement tool for emergency physicians in a retrospective analysis fashion. 17 Similarly, our study adds data to aid in the operational decision of the final disposition of the patient from the ED, providing a cognitive aid for identifying patients who may benefit from a higher level of care. Our results are congruent, albeit with different magnitudes, with recent data from Mora et al 10 …”

“…Therefore, it can be inferred that most patients are admitted to the appropriate level of care and do not decompensate within the first 12 hours. Currently, there is no standard quality metric review analyzing these events, ranging from six (as in our institution) to 24 hours; 17 therefore, we decided to adopt a 12-hour framework as a pragmatic middle point.…”

Comparison of effectiveness between a conventional catheter and a manual commercial catheter

“…[1][2][3][4] Sin embargo, de todos los pacientes adultos que ingresan al servicio de urgencias en estado crítico, solo en el 60% se logra obtener un acceso vascular periférico permeable en los primeros minutos, 5 y en el escenario donde no se logra obtener un acceso vascular, la mortalidad aumenta hasta un 92%. 4,6,7 Por esto, se ha establecido un sistema de respuesta rápida integrado por personal entrenado en acceso vasculares de alta complejidad, entre los que se encuentran los accesos intraóseos y los accesos venosos centrales. 7,8 Esto permite lograr un mejor y más efectivo manejo para disminuir la morbimortalidad del paciente crítico.…”

“…4,6,7 Por esto, se ha establecido un sistema de respuesta rápida integrado por personal entrenado en acceso vasculares de alta complejidad, entre los que se encuentran los accesos intraóseos y los accesos venosos centrales. 7,8 Esto permite lograr un mejor y más efectivo manejo para disminuir la morbimortalidad del paciente crítico. Dado que en los servicios de urgencias no se tiene disponibilidad de dispositivos intraóseos por su alto costo, hay necesidad de tener otras opciones terapéuticas para la administración de medicamentos en el paciente crítico, a fin de poder disminuir la mortalidad con base en la calidad de la atención en salud y con equipos de respuesta rápida.…”

Failure of high-flow nasal cannula and delayed intubation: a new harmful sequence?

“…Second, the study could not control for unknown biases that MET groups could have had for or against ICU transfer and/or the timing of ETI. It would be interesting to know whether ICU admission criteria used by MET groups evolved during observation period [5].…”