Trial reportPloS one2025
Pragmatic, quasi-experimental, pseudo-randomized clinical trial to assess the impact of patient safety monitors on clinical and patient safety outcomes: The Akershus Clinical Trial (ACT) 1.
Trial report in PloS one, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Norwegian National Action Plan for Patient Safety and Quality Improvement recommends implementing electronic patient safety monitors (PSM) in Norwegian hospitals. We hypothesized that PSM implementation would reduce hospital length of stay, with secondary endpoints related to clinical and patient safety outcomes.
methodsWe performed a retrospective single-center, pragmatic, quasi-experimental, pseudo-randomized controlled trial assessing differences in endpoints for patients admitted before (control group: years 2019-2020) and after PSM implementation (intervention group: years 2021-2022) in two orthopedic bays in a Norwegian teaching hospital. To account for temporal changes unrelated to PSM, we assessed the same endpoints for 2019-2020 vs. 2021-2022 in two orthopedic bays that did not implement PSM. Data extraction from the local data warehouse was controlled according to internal standards, and we predefined all statistical analyses.
resultsThe intervention group (n = 2786) and the control group (n = 2610) were evenly distributed for baseline characteristics, including age (median 73 [quartile 1-3 55-83] vs. 72 [55-83] years, p = 0.29), female sex (76.2% vs. 76.4%, p = 0.96), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.24). Median hospital length of stay was 4.4 (2.1-7.7) days after implementation of PSM compared to 4.3 (2.0-7.2) days in the control group (p = 0.046 for difference between the groups). Nutritional screening and fall screening within 24 hours were lower in the intervention group compared to the control group, while medical reconciliation during the hospital stay was higher in the intervention group. We found no differences between the groups in 30-day or 1-year readmission or mortality rates. Hospital length of stay was similar in 2021-2022 vs. 2019-2020 for the bays that did not implement PSM.
conclusionThe implementation of PSMs in this study did not improve clinical or patient safety outcomes. Hospital length of stay was statistically longer after PSM implementation, although the difference was not clinically relevant.
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.