Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29474347›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of anaesthesiology2018

Improving detection of patient deterioration in the general hospital ward environment.

Jean-Louis Vincent, Sharon Einav, Rupert Pearse, Samir Jaber, Peter Kranke, Frank J Overdyk, David K Whitaker, Federico Gordo, Albert Dahan, Andreas Hoeft

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of anaesthesiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Data-driven modelling of IRCU patient flow during the COVID-19 pandemic.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jean-Louis VincentFrom the Department of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium (J-LV), Intensive Care Unit, Shaare Zedek Medical Centre, Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel (SE), Adult Critical Care Unit, Royal London Hospital, London, UK (RP), Department of Critical Care Medicine and Anaesthesiology, Saint Eloi University Hospital and Montpellier School of Medicine, Research Unit INSERM U1046, Montpellier, France (SJ), Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, University Hospitals of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (PK), Department of Anaesthesiology, Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, New York, USA (FJO), Department of Anaesthesia, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK (DKW), Department of Intensive Care, Henares University Hospital, Coslada (FG), Health Science School, Francisco de Vitoria University, UFV, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain (FG), Department of Anaesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands (AD) and Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Germany (AH).
Sharon Einav
Rupert Pearse
Samir Jaber
Peter Kranke
Frank J Overdyk
David K Whitaker
Federico Gordo
Albert Dahan
Andreas Hoeft

Funding

Department of Health RP_2014-04-022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

: Patient monitoring on low acuity general hospital wards is currently based largely on intermittent observations and measurements of simple variables, such as blood pressure and temperature, by nursing staff. Often several hours can pass between such measurements and patient deterioration can go unnoticed. Moreover, the integration and interpretation of the information gleaned through these measurements remains highly dependent on clinical judgement. More intensive monitoring, which is commonly used in peri-operative and intensive care settings, is more likely to lead to the early identification of patients who are developing complications than is intermittent monitoring. Early identification can trigger appropriate management, thereby reducing the need for higher acuity care, reducing hospital lengths of stay and admission costs and even, at times, improving survival. However, this degree of monitoring has thus far been considered largely inappropriate for general hospital ward settings due to device costs and the need for staff expertise in data interpretation. In this review, we discuss some developing options to improve patient monitoring and thus detection of deterioration in low acuity general hospital wards.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionHospitalizationHumansMonitoring, PhysiologicPatients' RoomsRespiration Disorders

Identifiers

PMID29474347
PMCPMC5902137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.