Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/32558
Title: | Clinicians' use and perceptions of the pre-medical emergency team tier of one rapid response system: A mixed-methods study. | Austin Authors: | Sprogis, Stephanie K;Currey, Judy;Jones, Daryl A ;Considine, Julie | Affiliation: | Deakin University, School of Nursing and Midwifery & Centre for Quality and Patient Safety in the Institute for Health Transformation, 1 Gheringhap St, Geelong, Victoria, 3220, Australia. Intensive Care Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research - Eastern Health Partnership, 2/5 Arnold St, Box Hill, Victoria, 3128, Australia. School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia. |
Issue Date: | Nov-2023 | Date: | 2023 | Publication information: | Australian Critical Care: Official Journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses 2023-11; 36(6) | Abstract: | The pre-medical emergency team (pre-MET) tier of rapid response systems facilitates early recognition and treatment of deteriorating ward patients using ward-based clinicians before a MET review is needed. However, there is growing concern that the pre-MET tier is inconsistently used. This study aimed to explore clinicians' use of the pre-MET tier. A sequential mixed-methods design was used. Participants were clinicians (nurses, allied health, doctors) caring for patients on two wards of one Australian hospital. Observations and medical record audits were conducted to identify pre-MET events and examine clinicians' use of the pre-MET tier as per hospital policy. Clinician interviews expanded on understandings gained from observation data. Descriptive and thematic analyses were performed. Observations identified 27 pre-MET events for 24 patients that involved 37 clinicians (nurses = 24, speech pathologist = 1, doctors = 12). Nurses initiated assessments or interventions for 92.6% (n = 25/27) of pre-MET events; however, only 51.9% (n = 14/27) of pre-MET events were escalated to doctors. Doctors attended pre-MET reviews for 64.3% (n = 9/14) of escalated pre-MET events. Median time between escalation of care and in-person pre-MET review was 30 min (interquartile range: 8-36). Policy-specified clinical documentation was partially completed for 35.7% (n = 5/14) of escalated pre-MET events. Thirty-two interviews with 29 clinicians (nurses = 18, physiotherapists = 4, doctors = 7) culminated in three themes: Early Deterioration on a Spectrum, A Safety Net, and Demands Versus Resources. There were multiple gaps between pre-MET policy and clinicians' use of the pre-MET tier. To optimise use of the pre-MET tier, pre-MET policy must be critically reviewed and system-based barriers to recognising and responding to pre-MET deterioration addressed. | URI: | https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/32558 | DOI: | 10.1016/j.aucc.2023.01.010 | ORCID: | Journal: | Australian Critical Care: Official Journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses | PubMed URL: | 36948918 | Type: | Journal Article | Subjects: | Clinical deterioration Health policy Hospital rapid response team Patient care team Patient safety |
Appears in Collections: | Journal articles |
Show full item record
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.