Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37365897›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical nursing2023

Vital sign assessment and nursing interventions in medical and surgical patients with rapid response system triggers.

Julie Considine, Alison M Hutchinson, Imogen Mitchell, Shalika Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Mohammadreza Mohebbi, Jennifer J Watts, Tracey Bucknall

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Julie ConsidineSchool of Nursing and Midwifery and Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research in the Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3801-2456
Alison M HutchinsonSchool of Nursing and Midwifery and Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research in the Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5065-2726
Imogen MitchellResearch and Academic Partnerships, Canberra Health Services, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6013-4922
Shalika Bohingamu MudiyanselageSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1090-4401
Mohammadreza MohebbiBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9713-7211
Jennifer J WattsSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8095-8638
Tracey BucknallSchool of Nursing and Midwifery and Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research in the Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9089-3583
Deakin University · AUAustralian National University · AUBarwon Health · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIM(S): To explore vital sign assessment (both complete and incomplete sets of vital signs), and escalation of care per policy and nursing interventions in response to clinical deterioration.

designThis cohort study is a secondary analysis of data from the Prioritising Responses of Nurses To deteriorating patient Observations cluster randomised controlled trial of a facilitation intervention on nurses' vital sign measurement and escalation of care for deteriorating patients.

methodsThe study was conducted in 36 wards at four metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia. Medical records of all included patients from the study wards during three randomly selected 24-h periods within the same week were audited at three time points: pre-intervention (June 2016), and at 6 (December 2016) and 12 months (June 1017) post-intervention. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the study data, and relationships between variables were examined using chi-square test.

resultsA total of 10,383 audits were conducted. At least one vital sign measurement was documented every 8 h in 91.6% of audits, and a complete set of vital signs was documented every 8 h in 83.1% of audits. There were pre-Medical Emergency Team, Medical Emergency Team or Cardiac Arrest Team triggers in 25.8% of audits. When triggers were present, a rapid response system call occurred in 26.8% of audits. There were 1350 documented nursing interventions in audits with pre-Medical Emergency Team (n = 2403) or Medical Emergency Team triggers (n = 273). One or more nursing interventions were documented in 29.5% of audits with pre-Medical Emergency Team triggers and 63.7% of audits with Medical Emergency Team triggers.

conclusionWhen rapid response system triggers were documented, there were gaps in escalation of care per policy; however, nurses undertook a range of interventions within their scope of practice in response to clinical deterioration. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Medical and surgical ward nurses in acute care wards frequently engage in vital sign assessment. Interventions by medical and nurgical nurses may occur prior to, or in parallel with calling the rapid response system. Nursing interventions are a key but under-recognised element of the organisational response to deteriorating patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nurses engage in a range of nursing interventions to manage deteriorating patients, (aside from rapid response system activation) that are not well understood, nor well described in the literature to date. IMPACT: This study addresses the gap in the literature regarding nurses' management of deteriorating patients within their scope of practice (aside from RRS activation) in real world settings. When rapid response system triggers were documented, there were gaps in escalation of care per policy; however, nurses undertook a range of interventions within their scope of practice in response to clinical deterioration. The results of this research are relevant to nurses working on medical and surgical wards. REPORTING

methodThe trial was reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for Cluster Trials recommendations, and this paper is reported according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Indexed as

Clinical DeteriorationCohort StudiesHospitalsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVictoriaVital Signsclinical decision-makingclinical deteriorationnursingpatient assessmentrapid response systemvital signs

Identifiers

PMID37365897
PMCPMC10946594
OpenAlexW4382182239

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.