Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41005782›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Rapid response teams and recommended ward-based management of acute deterioration: a single-centre retrospective cohort study in an inner-city London (UK) teaching hospital.

Sophie Hadfield, Marc Zentar, Mark McPhail, Eloise Helme, Rebecca Broderick, Francesca Logan, Robert Loveridge, Emma Madine, Imogen Vining, Julia Wendon and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Sophie HadfieldDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Marc ZentarDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mark McPhailSchool of Immunology and Microbial Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Eloise HelmeDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Rebecca BroderickDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Francesca LoganDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Robert LoveridgeDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Emma MadineDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Imogen ViningKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Julia WendonLiver Intensive Therapy Unit, Institute of Liver Studies, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Victoria MetaxaDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4232-6845
Daniel HadfieldDepartment of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK daniel.hadfield@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0334-7221

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the associations between Rapid Response Team (RRT) patient review and other predefined clinical management actions, with risk of in-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital mortality in the first unplanned admission (UPA) to the adult intensive care unit (ICU) from the ward environment for each patient.To describe a novel RRT assessment tool for ward-based care for patients who were deteriorating.

designA retrospective cohort study.

settingA large multispecialty, tertiary referral and teaching hospital in England, UK.

participantsThe study included 3175 consecutive adult ICU UPAs from hospital wards over a 6-year period (2014-2019). OUTCOME MEASURES: Ward-based management of deterioration prior to ICU admission was assessed by the RRT, using a scored checklist-the UPA score. Admissions were compared in two groups according to their exposure to an RRT review in the 72 hours before ICU admission. Associations with in-hospital cardiac arrest within 24 hours before ICU admission and all-cause in-hospital mortality were estimated, using unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95%CI.

resultsRRT review occurred in 1413 (44.5%) admissions and was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest (aOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.78; p<0.001), but similar odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.12; p=0.65). The median (IQR) UPA score was 1 (0 to 2), and each point increase was associated with increased odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest (aOR 1.13; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.23; p<0.001) and in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.10; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.15; p<0.001). Among individual UPA score items, Nursing Escalation Failure, Blood Gas Omission and Laboratory Blood Omission were associated with increased odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest, whereas Delayed Vital Signs and Failure to Recognise Deterioration were associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: An RRT review in the 72 hours prior to ICU admission was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest but did not impact in-hospital mortality. Higher UPA scores were associated with increased incidence of both in-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital mortality. In addition, this study describes a novel and adaptable RRT scoring tool (the UPA score) for safety monitoring and quality improvement.

Indexed as

Clinical DeteriorationHeart ArrestHospital Rapid Response TeamAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHospital MortalityHospitals, TeachingHumansIntensive Care UnitsLondonMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesInpatientsINTENSIVE & CRITICAL CAREObservational StudyPatient Care ManagementRetrospective StudiesSafety

Identifiers

PMID41005782
PMCPMC12481366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.