Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33752731›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2021

Comparison of clinical outcomes between nurse practitioner and registrar-led medical emergency teams: a propensity-matched analysis.

Sachin Gupta, Mayurathan Balachandran, Gaby Bolton, Naomi Pratt, Jo Molloy, Eldho Paul, Ravindranath Tiruvoipati

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors.

Sachin GuptaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Mayurathan BalachandranDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Gaby BoltonDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Naomi PrattDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Jo MolloyDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Eldho PaulANZIC-RC, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Ravindranath TiruvoipatiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia. travindranath@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3800-902X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMedical emergency teams (MET) are mostly led by physicians. Some hospitals are currently using nurse practitioners (NP) to lead MET calls. These are no studies comparing clinical outcomes between these two care models. To determine whether NP-led MET calls are associated with lower risk of acute patient deterioration, when compared to intensive care (ICU) registrar (ICUR)-led MET calls.

methodsThe composite primary outcome included recurrence of MET call, occurrence of code blue or ICU admission within 24 h. Secondary outcomes were mortality within 24 h of MET call, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and proportion of patients discharged home. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias from confounding factors between the ICUR and NP group.

resultsA total of 1343 MET calls were included (1070 NP, 273 ICUR led). On Univariable analysis, the incidence of the primary outcome was higher in ICUR-led MET calls (26.7% vs. 20.6%, p = 0.03). Of the secondary outcome measures, mortality within 24 h (3.4% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.002) and hospital mortality (12.7% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.001) were higher in ICUR-led MET calls. Propensity score-matched analysis of 263 pairs revealed the composite primary outcome was comparable between both groups, but NP-led group was associated with reduced risk of hospital mortality (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.91, p = 0.02) and higher likelihood of discharge home (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.2, p = 0.015).

conclusionAcute patient deterioration was comparable between ICUR- and NP-led MET calls. NP-led MET calls were associated with lower hospital mortality and higher likelihood of discharge home.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMedical Staff, HospitalMiddle AgedNurse PractitionersOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Care TeamPropensity ScoreQuality Indicators, Health CareDeteriorationDischargeMedical emergency teamMortality

Identifiers

PMID33752731
PMCPMC7986296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.