4.6 Article

Clinical impact of implementing a rapid-response team based on the Modified Early Warning Score in wards that offer emergency department support

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 16, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259577

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Implementing a rapid response team (RRT) triggered by the modified early warning score (MEWS) in high-risk wards offering ED support is associated with decreased in-hospital mortality rate, as observed in this study.
Background Emergency department (ED) crowding is a frequent situation. To decrease this overload, patients without a life-threating condition are transferred to wards that offer ED support. This study aimed to evaluate if implementing a rapid response team (RRT) triggered by the modified early warning score (MEWS) in high-risk wards offering ED support is associated with decreased in-hospital mortality rate. Methods A before-and-after cross-sectional study compared in-hospital mortality rates before and after implementation of an RRT triggered by the MEWS >= 4 in two wards of a tertiary hospital that offer ED support. Results We included 6863 patients hospitalized in these wards before RRT implementation from July 2015 through June 2017 and 6944 patients hospitalized in these same wards after RRT implementation from July 2018 through June 2020. We observed a statistically significant decrease in the in-hospital mortality rate after intervention, 449 deaths/6944 hospitalizations [6.47% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.91%- 7.07%)] compared to 534 deaths/6863 hospitalizations [7.78% (95% CI 7.17-8.44)] before intervention; with an absolute risk reduction of -1.31% (95% CI -2.20-0.50). Conclusion RRT trigged by the MEWS >= 4 in high-risk wards that offer ED support was found to be associated with a decreased in-hospital mortality rate. A further cluster-randomized trial should evaluate the impact of this intervention in this setting.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available