From the IMPAQ International, LLC, Columbia, Maryland.
Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
J Patient Saf. 2020 Sep;16(3S Suppl 1):S3-S7. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000748.
The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence on the impact of rapid response teams (RRTs) on failure to rescue events.
Systematic searches were conducted using CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and Cochrane, for articles published from 2008 to 2018. English-language, peer-reviewed articles reporting the impact of RRTs on failure to rescue events, including hospital mortality and in-hospital cardiac arrest events, were included. For selected articles, the authors abstracted information, with the study designed to be compliant with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
Ten articles were identified for inclusion: 3 meta-analyses, 3 systematic reviews, and 4 single studies. The systematic reviews and meta-analyses were of moderate-to-high quality, limited by the methodological quality of the included individual studies. The single studies were both observational and investigational in design. Patient outcomes included hospital mortality (8 studies), in-hospital cardiac arrests (9 studies), and intensive care unit (ICU) transfer rates (5 studies). There was variation in the composition of RRTs, and 4 studies conducted subanalyses to examine the effect of physician inclusion on patient outcomes.
There is moderate evidence linking the implementation of RRTs with decreased mortality and non-ICU cardiac arrest rates. Results linking RRT to ICU transfer rates are inconclusive and challenging to interpret. There is some evidence to support the use of physician-led teams, although evaluation of team composition was variable. Lastly, the benefits of RRTs may take a significant period after implementation to be realized, owing to the need for change in safety culture.
本系统评价的目的是综合快速反应团队(RRT)对救援失败事件影响的证据。
使用 CINAHL、MEDLINE、PsychINFO 和 Cochrane 对 2008 年至 2018 年发表的文章进行系统搜索。纳入报告 RRT 对救援失败事件(包括医院死亡率和院内心脏骤停事件)影响的英语同行评审文章。对于选定的文章,作者提取信息,研究设计符合系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南。
确定了 10 篇文章纳入:3 项荟萃分析,3 项系统评价和 4 项单独研究。系统评价和荟萃分析的质量为中等到高度,受到纳入的个别研究方法学质量的限制。单篇研究设计均为观察性和调查性。患者结局包括医院死亡率(8 项研究)、院内心脏骤停(9 项研究)和重症监护病房(ICU)转率(5 项研究)。RRT 的组成存在差异,4 项研究进行了亚分析以检查医生参与对患者结局的影响。
有中等证据表明实施 RRT 可降低死亡率和非 ICU 心脏骤停率。将 RRT 与 ICU 转率联系起来的结果尚无定论,难以解释。有一些证据支持使用医生主导的团队,尽管对团队组成的评估存在差异。最后,由于需要改变安全文化,RRT 的好处可能需要实施后很长一段时间才能实现。