1 / 27

Controversies in Rapid Response Systems

Controversies in Rapid Response Systems. Carl Hinkson, RRT Harborview Medical Center. Table of Contents. Evolution of Rapid Response systems What are Rapid Response systems What evidence supports their use What are the different teams and which is best

sopoline-tyson
Download Presentation

Controversies in Rapid Response Systems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Controversies in Rapid Response Systems Carl Hinkson, RRT Harborview Medical Center

  2. Table of Contents • Evolution of Rapid Response systems • What are Rapid Response systems • What evidence supports their use • What are the different teams and which is best • What triggers should be used to activate • Other controversies

  3. Rapid Response System History • In 1999 the Institute of Medicine published a report, To Err is Human: Building a Safer System • Report concluded 44,000 – 98,000 people die each year as a result of preventable medical errors • Followed by the IM Crossing the Quality Chasm

  4. Rapid Response System History • The Institute of Healthcare Improvement launched their “Saving 100,000 lives campaign” which featured six “planks” in 2004 • Medication Reconciliation • Prevention of surgical site infections • Prevention of ventilator associated pneumonia • Evidence-based care for acute myocardial infarctions • Prevention of central line infections • Rapid Response Teams

  5. Rapid Response Systems • A team of clinicians who respond to patients hospitalized outside the ICU when they meet a “clinical trigger” or other predetermined mechanism • Team provides rapid assessment and triage • Here to stay – JCAHO is requiring hospitals to have “rapid response system” in place

  6. Rapid Response Systems • Components • Afferent Limb • How RRS is activated • Efferent Limb • How the RRS responds • Evaluative Process • Data collection on RRS effectiveness • Administrative or Governance Structure • Hiring/ firing etc

  7. Rapid Response Systems DeVita et al. Findings of the First Consensus Conference on Medical Emergency Teams. Crit Care Med. 2006; 34(9): 2463-2478.

  8. What does the evidence say? • Winter’s et al conducted a literature review • Searched medical literature database • From 10228 possible articles, 8 were determined to be applicable Winters et al. Rapid response sytems: A systematic review. Crit Care. 2007; 35(5): 1238-1243

  9. Evidence to Support RRS Winters et al. Rapid response sytems: A systematic review. Crit Care. 2007; 35(5) 1238-1243.

  10. Evidence to Support RRS Winters et al. Rapid response sytems: A systematic review. Crit Care. 2007; 35(5) 1238-1243

  11. Winters et al Conclusions: • “weak to moderate” level of evidence to support RRS in reducing hospital mortality and cardiac arrest rates • Large randomized trials are needed to prove that RRS are effective • Observational studies may have been influenced by “Hawthorne” effect

  12. Merit Study • Large cluster-randomized trial • Showed no effect • Criticism of Merit Study include: • Increase in “RRS-like” activities in control hospitals • Sudden decrease in end-points in control • Study was underpowered

  13. What are the different teams and which is best? • Medical Emergency Teams (MET) • Physician-lead • RN & RT support • Ramp down model • Rapid Response Teams (RRT) • RN & RT lead w/ dedicated on call physician • Ramp up model • Critical Care Outreach (CCO) • RRT/ MET with prospective / proactive component

  14. MET- MD lead Pros: Immediate definitive treatment Advanced airway management and central venous access Cons Expensive Intimidating to bedside staff to activate RRT - RN/RT lead Pros Less expensive Less intimidating to beside staff to activate Cons Less efficient; Delay to definitive treatment Which team is best?

  15. Which team is best? • MET vs RRT Response Teams: • No mortality difference in observational studies

  16. Additional Members? • Pharmacists!? • Pharmacists are included in the RRS at Long Beach Memorial • Supported by IHI and SCCM

  17. What triggers should be used? • A wide variety of activation criteria exists • There is little evidence to support their validity Winters et al. Rapid response sytems: A systematic review. Crit Care. 2007; 35(5) 1238-1243.

  18. Types of Triggering Systems • Aggregate Scoring Systems • Scores combining several physiologic parameters • Modified Early Warning System (MEWS) • Patient At Risk Team (PART) calling criteria • Single Parameter criteria • Routine observations of vital signs • Harborview RRT calling criteria • Combination scoring system • Incorporates aggregate scoring system • Team is activated if any single parameter scores “at Highest”

  19. Aggregate Scoring Methods • Modified Early Warning System (MEWS) • RRS is activated when score >4 or 5 Gardner-Thorpe et al. The value of modified early warning score (MEWS) in a surgical in-patients: a prospective observational study Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006; 88:571-5

  20. Aggregate Scoring Methods • Patient At Risk Team (PART) criteria • RRS activated when patient meets 3 or more criteria or absolute criteria Goldhill et al. The patient-at-risk team: identifying and managing seriously ill ward patients. Anaesthesia. 1999; 54: 853-860

  21. Single parameter trigger criteria  Intuitive sense that something is wrong with patient  Acute change in mental status  New onset of agitation or restlessness  Acute change in respiratory status:  Stridor – noisy airway  Respiratory rate  < 12  > 32  Increased WOB  SaO2 < 92% with increased FiO2  ABG requested for respiratory concern  Acute change in CV status  HR < 55  > 120  SBP  <90  > 170  New onset of chest pain  Acute change in temp.  < 35  > 39.5

  22. Scoring System Pros Less False alarms Higher scores are able to predict poor outcomes Cons More complex for bedside staff Some do not include subjective criteria Clinical triggers Pros Easy for bedside staff to use Cons More false alarms Triggering Systems

  23. Triggering Systems • What does the evidence say? • At present no studies have compared different activation criteria • No single activation criteria has been adequately validated • A systematic review by Gao et al was unable adequately compare data due to heterogenity

  24. Triggering Systems • Subjective “worry” criteria versus Objective criteria • Family members activating RRS?

  25. Should We Have Continuous Monitoring for Everyone?

  26. Would better bedside staffing & training help • Better nursing staff levels? • Aiken et al demonstrated that higher patient to nurse ratios resulted in higher risk for 30 day mortality and failure to rescue • Better education for bedside caregivers? • RNs’ with 4 year education had lower 30 day mortality and failure to rescue than did 2 year educated RNs’

  27. Summary • Evolutions of Rapid Response systems • What are Rapid Response systems • What evidence supports their use • What are the different teams and which is best • What triggers should be used to activate • Other controversies

More Related