• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

实践中的分层升级响应系统:一项关于工作量影响的事后分析

Tiered escalation response systems in practice: A post hoc analysis examining the workload implications.

作者信息

O'Connell Alice, Flabouris Arthas, Edwards Suzanne, Thompson Campbell H

机构信息

Consultant, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

出版信息

Crit Care Resusc. 2023 May 20;25(1):47-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ccrj.2023.04.010. eCollection 2023 Mar.

DOI:10.1016/j.ccrj.2023.04.010
PMID:37876991
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10581276/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Many rapid response systems now have multiple tiers of escalation in addition to the traditional single tier of a medical emergency team. Given that the benefit to patient outcomes of this change is unclear, we sought to investigate the workload implications of a multitiered system, including the impact of trigger modification.

DESIGN

The study design incorporated a post hoc analysis using a matched case-control dataset.

SETTING

The study setting was an acute, adult tertiary referral hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Cases that had an adverse event (cardiac arrest or unanticipated intensive care unit admission) or a rapid response team (RRT) call participated in the study. Controls were matched by age, gender, ward and time of year, and no adverse event or RRT call. Participants were admitted between May 2014 and April 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure were the number of reviews, triggers, and modifications across three tiers of escalation; a nurse review, a multidisciplinary review (MDT-admitting medical team review), and an RRT call.

RESULTS

There were 321 cases and 321 controls. Overall, there were 1948 nurse triggers, of which 1431 (73.5%) were in cases and 517 (26.5%) in controls, 798 MDT triggers (660 [82.7%] in cases and 138 [17.3%] in controls), and 379 RRT triggers (351 [92.6%] in cases and 28 [7.4%] in controls). Per patient per 24 h, there were 3.03 nurse, 1.24 MDT, and 0.59 RRT triggers. Accounting for modifications, this reduced to 2.17, 0.88, and 0.42, respectively. The proportion of triggers that were modified, so as not to trigger a review, was similar across all the tiers, being 28.6% of nurse, 29.6% of MDT, and 28.2% of RRT triggers. Per patient per 24 h, there were 0.61 nurse reviews, 0.52 MDT reviews, and 0.08 RRT reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower-tier triggers were more prevalent, and modifications were common. Modifications significantly mitigated the escalation workload across all tiers of a multitiered system.

摘要

目的

现在许多快速反应系统除了传统的单一层级医疗急救团队外,还有多个升级层级。鉴于这种变化对患者预后的益处尚不清楚,我们试图研究多层级系统对工作量的影响,包括触发因素修改的影响。

设计

本研究设计采用了基于匹配病例对照数据集的事后分析。

设置

研究设置为一家急性成人三级转诊医院。

参与者

发生不良事件(心脏骤停或意外入住重症监护病房)或呼叫快速反应团队(RRT)的病例参与了研究。对照组按年龄、性别、病房和年份时间进行匹配,且无不良事件或RRT呼叫。参与者于2014年5月至2015年4月期间入院。

主要结局指标

主要结局指标为三个升级层级的审查、触发因素和修改的数量;护士审查、多学科审查(MDT - 收治医疗团队审查)和RRT呼叫。

结果

有321例病例和321例对照。总体而言,有1948次护士触发,其中1431次(73.5%)发生在病例组,517次(26.5%)发生在对照组;798次MDT触发(660次[82.7%]在病例组,138次[17.3%]在对照组);379次RRT触发(351次[92.6%]在病例组,28次[7.4%]在对照组)。每24小时每例患者,有3.03次护士触发、1.24次MDT触发和0.59次RRT触发。考虑到修改因素,这分别降至2.17次、0.88次和0.42次。在所有层级中,为避免触发审查而修改的触发因素比例相似,护士触发因素中为28.6%,MDT触发因素中为29.6%,RRT触发因素中为28.2%。每24小时每例患者,有0.61次护士审查、0.52次MDT审查和0.08次RRT审查。

结论

较低层级的触发因素更为普遍,且修改很常见。修改显著减轻了多层级系统所有层级的升级工作量。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2942/10581276/8d79707113da/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2942/10581276/6354144d1eb8/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2942/10581276/8d79707113da/gr2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2942/10581276/6354144d1eb8/gr1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2942/10581276/8d79707113da/gr2.jpg

相似文献

1
Tiered escalation response systems in practice: A post hoc analysis examining the workload implications.实践中的分层升级响应系统:一项关于工作量影响的事后分析
Crit Care Resusc. 2023 May 20;25(1):47-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ccrj.2023.04.010. eCollection 2023 Mar.
2
Predictive value of a tiered escalation response system: A case control study.分层递进式响应系统的预测价值:一项病例对照研究。
Aust Crit Care. 2023 Nov;36(6):1067-1073. doi: 10.1016/j.aucc.2023.01.012. Epub 2023 Apr 5.
3
Multi-Tiered Observation and Response Charts: Prevalence and Incidence of Triggers, Modifications and Calls, to Acutely Deteriorating Adult Patients.多层观察与反应图表:成年急重症患者触发因素、调整措施及呼叫的发生率与患病率
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 30;10(12):e0145339. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145339. eCollection 2015.
4
A newly designed observation and response chart's effect upon adverse inpatient outcomes and rapid response team activity.新设计的观察与反应表对住院患者不良结局和快速反应团队活动的影响。
Intern Med J. 2016 Aug;46(8):909-16. doi: 10.1111/imj.13137.
5
Surgical intensive care - current and future challenges?外科重症监护——当前及未来的挑战?
Qatar Med J. 2020 Jan 13;2019(2):3. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.3. eCollection 2019.
6
7
Rapid response team trigger modifications: are we using them safely?快速反应团队触发修改:我们是否安全地使用它们?
Intern Med J. 2020 Dec;50(12):1513-1517. doi: 10.1111/imj.14702.
8
Rapid Response Team activation in New Zealand hospitals-a multicentre prospective observational study.新西兰医院快速反应小组的启动——一项多中心前瞻性观察性研究
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2016 May;44(3):391-7. doi: 10.1177/0310057X1604400314.
9
Rapid response team activations within 24 hours of admission from the emergency department: an innovative approach for performance improvement.急诊科入院后24小时内启动快速反应小组:一种改进绩效的创新方法。
Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Jun;21(6):667-72. doi: 10.1111/acem.12394.
10
Vital Signs Predict Rapid-Response Team Activation Within Twelve Hours of Emergency Department Admission.生命体征可预测急诊科入院后12小时内快速反应小组的启动。
West J Emerg Med. 2016 May;17(3):324-30. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2016.2.28501. Epub 2016 Apr 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Afferent limb failure revisited - A retrospective, international, multicentre, cohort study of delayed rapid response team calls.再探传入肢体衰竭——一项关于延迟快速反应团队呼叫的回顾性、国际性、多中心队列研究。
Resuscitation. 2020 Nov;156:6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.117. Epub 2020 Sep 1.
2
Rapid response team trigger modifications: are we using them safely?快速反应团队触发修改:我们是否安全地使用它们?
Intern Med J. 2020 Dec;50(12):1513-1517. doi: 10.1111/imj.14702.
3
Interruptions and Delivery of Care in the Intensive Care Unit.
重症监护病房中的中断与护理提供。
Hum Factors. 2019 Jun;61(4):564-576. doi: 10.1177/0018720819838090. Epub 2019 Apr 4.
4
Between the flags: implementing a safety-net system at scale to recognise and manage deteriorating patients in the New South Wales Public Health System.在旗帜之间:在新南威尔士州公共卫生系统中大规模实施安全网系统,以识别和管理病情恶化的患者。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2017 Feb 1;29(1):130-136. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzw132.
5
A newly designed observation and response chart's effect upon adverse inpatient outcomes and rapid response team activity.新设计的观察与反应表对住院患者不良结局和快速反应团队活动的影响。
Intern Med J. 2016 Aug;46(8):909-16. doi: 10.1111/imj.13137.
6
Multi-Tiered Observation and Response Charts: Prevalence and Incidence of Triggers, Modifications and Calls, to Acutely Deteriorating Adult Patients.多层观察与反应图表:成年急重症患者触发因素、调整措施及呼叫的发生率与患病率
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 30;10(12):e0145339. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145339. eCollection 2015.
7
Alarm fatigue: impacts on patient safety.警报疲劳:对患者安全的影响。
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015 Dec;28(6):685-90. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000260.
8
Realistic distractions and interruptions that impair simulated surgical performance by novice surgeons.现实中的干扰和打断会削弱新手外科医生的模拟手术表现。
Arch Surg. 2012 Nov;147(11):1026-30. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2012.1480.
9
The effects of introduction of new observation charts and calling criteria on call characteristics and outcome of hospitalised patients.新观察表和呼叫标准的引入对住院患者的呼叫特征和结果的影响。
Crit Care Resusc. 2012 Mar;14(1):38-43.
10
The helpful or hindering effects of in-hospital patient monitor alarms on nurses: a qualitative analysis.住院患者监护仪警报对护士的促进或阻碍作用:一项定性分析。
Comput Inform Nurs. 2012 Apr;30(4):210-7. doi: 10.1097/NCN.0b013e31823eb581.