Search

Aim: To explore patient and family narratives about their recognition and response to clinical deterioration and their interactions with clinicians prior to and during Medical Emergency Team (MET) activations in hospital. Background: Research on clinical deterioration has mostly focused on clinicians' roles. Although patients and families can identify subtle cues of early deterioration, little research has focused on their experience of recognising, speaking up and communicating with clinicians during this period of instability. Design: A narrative inquiry. Methods: Using narrative interviewing techniques, 33 adult patients and 14 family members of patients, who had received a MET call, in one private and one public academic teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia were interviewed. Narrative analysis was conducted on the data. Results: The core story of help seeking for recognition and response by clinicians to patient deterioration yielded four subplots: (1) identifying deterioration, recognition that something was not right and different from earlier; (2) voicing concerns to their nurse or by family members on their behalf; (3) being heard, desiring a response acknowledging the legitimacy of their concerns; and (4) once concerns were expressed, there was an expectation of and trust in clinicians to act on the concerns and manage the situation. Conclusion: Clinical deterioration results in an additional burden for hospitalised patients and families to speak up, seek help and resolve their concerns. Educating patients and families on what to be concerned about and when to notify staff requires a close partnership with clinicians. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Clinicians must create an environment that enables patients and families to speak up. They must be alert to both subjective and objective information, to acknowledge and to act on the information accordingly. Reporting Method: The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines were used for reporting. Patient or Public Contribution: The consumer researcher was involved in design, data analysis and publication preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To develop and internally validate risk prediction models for subsequent clinical deterioration, unplanned ICU admission and death among ward patients following medical emergency team (MET) review. Design: A retrospective cohort study of 1500 patients who remained on a general ward following MET review at an Australian quaternary hospital. Method: Logistic regression was used to model (1) subsequent MET review within 48 h, (2) unplanned ICU admission within 48 h and (3) hospital mortality. Models included demographic, clinical and illness severity variables. Model performance was evaluated using discrimination and calibration with optimism‐corrected bootstrapped estimates. Findings are reported using the TRIPOD guideline for multivariable prediction models for prognosis or diagnosis. There was no patient or public involvement in the development and conduct of this study. Results: Within 48 h of index MET review, 8.3% (n = 125) of patients had a subsequent MET review, 7.2% (n = 108) had an unplanned ICU admission and in‐hospital mortality was 16% (n = 240). From clinically preselected predictors, models retained age, sex, comorbidity, resuscitation limitation, acuity‐dependency profile, MET activation triggers and whether the patient was within 24 h of hospital admission, ICU discharge or surgery. Models for subsequent MET review, unplanned ICU admission, and death had adequate accuracy in development and bootstrapped validation samples. Conclusion: Patients requiring MET review demonstrate complex clinical characteristics and the majority remain on the ward after review for deterioration. A risk score could be used to identify patients at risk of poor outcomes after MET review and support general ward clinical decision‐making. Relevance to clinical practice: Our risk calculator estimates risk for patient outcomes following MET review using clinical data available at the bedside. Future validation and implementation could support evidence‐informed team communication and patient placement decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Implementing evidence that changes practice in emergency departments (EDs) is notoriously difficult due to well-established barriers including high levels of uncertainty arising from undifferentiated nature of ED patients, resource shortages, workload unpredictability, high staff turnover, and a constantly changing environment. We developed and implemented a behaviour-change informed strategy to mitigate these barriers for a clinical trial to implement the evidence-based emergency nursing framework HIRAID® (History including Infection risk, Red flags, Assessment, Interventions, Diagnostics, communication, and reassessment) to reduce clinical variation, and increase safety and quality of emergency nursing care. Aim: To evaluate the behaviour-change-informed HIRAID® implementation strategy on reach, effectiveness, adoption, quality (dose, fidelity) and maintenance (sustainability). Methods: An effectiveness-implementation hybrid design including a step–wedge cluster randomised control trial (SW-cRCT) was used to implement HIRAID® with 1300 + emergency nurses across 29 Australian rural, regional, and metropolitan EDs. Evaluation of our behaviour-change informed strategy was informed by the RE-AIM Scoring Instrument and measured using data from (i) a post HIRAID® implementation emergency nurse survey, (ii) HIRAID® Instructor surveys, and (iii) twelve-week and 6-month documentation audits. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics to determine the level of each component of RE-AIM achieved. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis and used to understand the 'how' and 'why' of quantitative results. Results: HIRAID® was implemented in all 29 EDs, with 145 nurses undertaking instructor training and 1123 (82%) completing all four components of provider training at 12 weeks post-implementation. Modifications to the behaviour-change informed strategy were minimal. The strategy was largely used as intended with 100% dose and very high fidelity. We achieved extremely high individual sustainability (95% use of HIRAID® documentation templates) at 6 months and 100% setting sustainability at 3 years. Conclusion: The behaviour-change informed strategy for the emergency nursing framework HIRAID® in rural, regional, and metropolitan Australia was highly successful with extremely high reach and adoption, dose, fidelity, individual and setting sustainability across substantially variable clinical contexts. Trial registration: ANZCTR, ACTRN12621001456842. Registered 25 October 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to describe the implementation of a novel 50-bed continuous remote monitoring service for high-risk acute inpatients treated in non-critical wards, known as Health in a Virtual Environment (HIVE). We report the initial results, presenting the number and type of patients connected to the service, and assess key outcomes from this cohort. This was a prospective, observational study of characteristics and outcomes of patients connected to the HIVE continuous monitoring service at a major tertiary hospital and a smaller public hospital in Western Australia between January 2021 and June 2023. In the first two and a half years following implementation, 7541 patients were connected to HIVE for a total of 331,118 h. Overall, these patients had a median length of stay of 5 days (IQR 2, 10), 11.0% (n = 833) had an intensive care unit admission, 22.4% (n = 1691) had an all-cause emergency readmission within 28 days from hospital discharge, and 2.2% (n = 167) died in hospital. Conclusions: Our initial results show promise, demonstrating that this innovative approach to inpatient care can be successfully implemented to monitor high-risk patients in medical and surgical wards. Future studies will investigate the effectiveness of the program by comparing patients receiving HIVE supported care to comparable patients receiving routine care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]