ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Development of a novel rapid response event review process for quality improvement.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Operational characteristics of a hospital rapid response team for public-area emergencies: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRapid response team (RRT) and code activation events occur relatively commonly in inpatient settings. RRT systems have been the subject of a significant amount of analysis, although this has been largely focused on the impact of RRT system implementation and RRT events on patient outcomes. There is reason to believe that the structured assessment of RRT and code events may be an effective way to identify opportunities for system improvement, although no standardised approach to event analysis is widely accepted. We developed and refined a protocolised system of RRT and code event review, focused on sustainable, timely and high value event analysis meant to inform ongoing improvement activities.
methodsA group of clinicians with expertise in process and quality improvement created a protocolised analytic plan for rapid response event review, piloted and then iteratively optimised a systematic process which was applied to all subsequent cases to be reviewed.
resultsHospitalist reviewers were recruited and trained in a methodical approach. Each reviewer performed a chart review to summarise RRT events, and collect specific variables for each case (coding). Coding was then reviewed for concordance, at monthly interdisciplinary group meetings and 'Action Items' were identified and considered for implementation. In any 12-month period starting in 2021, approximately 12-15 distinct cases per month were reviewed and coded, offering ample opportunities to identify trends and patterns.
conclusionWe have developed an innovative process for ongoing review of RRT-Code events. The review process is easy to implement and has allowed for the timely identification of high value improvement opportunities.
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.