Rapid Response Teams: Is it Time to Reframe the Questions of Rapid Response Team Measurement?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to present an overview of rapid response team (RRT) history in the United States, provide a review of prior RRT effectiveness research, and propose the reframing of four new questions of RRT measurement that are designed to better understand RRTs in the context of contemporary nursing practice as well as patient outcomes.

ORGANIZING CONSTRUCT

RRTs were adopted in the United States because of their intuitive appeal, and despite a lack of evidence for their effectiveness. Subsequent studies used mortality and cardiac arrest rates to measure whether or not RRTs "work." Few studies have thoroughly examined the effect of RRTs on nurses and on nursing practice.

METHODS

An extensive literature review provided the background. Suppositions and four critical, unanswered questions arising from the literature are suggested.

FINDINGS

The results of RRT effectiveness, which have focused on patient-oriented outcomes, have been ambiguous, contradictory, and difficult to interpret. Additionally, they have not taken into account the multiple ways in which these teams have impacted nurses and nursing practice as well as patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

What happens in terms of RRT process and utilization is likely to have a major impact on nurses and nursing care on general medical and surgical wards. What that impact will be depends on what we can learn from measuring with an expanded yardstick, in order to answer the question, "Do RRTs work?"

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Evidence for the benefits of RRTs depends on proper framing of questions relating to their effectiveness, including the multiple ways RRTs contribute to nursing efficacy.