ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2022
Implementing a Rapid Response System in a tertiary-care hospital. A cost-effectiveness study.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- What Evidence is Available on Rapid Response Systems Across Europe? Findings From a Scoping Review.Nursing in critical care · 2025Article
- Review
- Costs, benefits and the prevention of patient deterioration.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe occurrence of adverse events (AE) in hospitalized patients substancially increases the risk of disability or death, having a major negative clinical and economic impact on public health. For early identification of patients at risk and to establish preventive measures, different healthcare systems have implemented rapid response systems (RRS). The aim of this study was to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis of implementing a RRS in a tertiary-care hospital.
methodsWe included all the patients admitted to Hospital Clínic de Barcelona from 1 to 2016 to 31 December 2016. The cost-effectiveness analysis was summarized as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (incremental cost divided by the incremental effectiveness of the two alternatives, RRS versus non-RRS). The effectiveness of the RRS, defined as improvements in health outcomes (AE, cardiopulmonary arrest and mortality), was obtained from the literature and applied to the included patient cohort. A budget impact analysis on the implementation of the RRS from a hospital perspective was performed over a 5-year time horizon.
results42,409 patients were included, and 448 (1.05%) had severe AE requiring ICU admission. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed an incremental cost (savings) of EUR - 1,471,101 of RRS versus the non-RRS. The budgetary impact showed a cost reduction of EUR 896,762.00 in the first year and EUR 1,588,579.00 from the second to the fifth year.
conclusionsThe present analysis shows the RRS as a dominant, less costly and more effective structure compared to the non-RRS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.