ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2025
Assessing the range of deployment for an intra-hospital medical emergency team.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical emergency teams (MET) play a crucial role in managing hospital emergencies. This single-center, retrospective cohort study at the University Medical Center Göttingen examines deployment patterns and operational challenges. Using the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) score, it assesses case severity, emergency care trends, and the influence of location and timing on patient outcomes. All MET calls handled by the Department of Anesthesiology from June 2019 to June 2023 were analyzed based on emergency documentation. 522 emergency protocols were analyzed. The most common reasons for MET activation were cardiovascular problems (32%), resuscitation (22%) and respiratory distress (15%). ROSC was achieved in 54.4% of CPR cases (62 out of 114 patients). On weekends, distribution of NACA scores shifted towards higher scores, OR = 1.831 (95% CI [1.298-2.583], p = 0.001). The severity of cases varied significantly between emergency locations (NACA score ≥ 5: public area: 1.3%, general ward: 56,8%, IMC: 65,2% and ICU: 86,8%, p < 0.001). There is a significant positive rank correlation of 0.566 (95%-CI [0.505-0.622], p < 0.001) between the NACA score and the duration of MET deployment. Severe emergencies (NACA 5-7) mainly occur on weekends and during late/night shifts, requiring specialized support. Higher NACA scores correlate with prolonged deployments, often exceeding 60 min. Optimizing alert systems and personnel planning is crucial for sustaining patient safety and care continuity.
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.