Skip to content

Impact of a Communication and Team-working Intervention on Performance and Effectiveness of a Medical Emergency Team

Impact of a Communication and Team-working Intervention on Performance and Effectiveness of a Medical Emergency Team

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01551160
Acronym
IMPACT
Enrollment
1500
Registered
2012-03-12
Start date
2014-07-31
Completion date
2016-09-30
Last updated
2016-11-25

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Hospital Rapid Response Team

Keywords

Non-technical skills, Crisis resource management, Medical Emergency Team, Rapid Response Team

Brief summary

Patients in hospital can have unexpected clinical emergencies. When this occurs the Medical Emergency Team (MET) are called with the intention of resolving the problem. Previous investigations have found that patients who have more than one call during their admission have worse outcomes than patients who only have one call. But it has not been established why. The aim of this research will be to examine these repeated calls and why patients subject to them go on to have worse outcomes. A predictive model will be developed to identify potential sources of risk. One potential source is poor communication between health care providers. An intervention to improve communication around MET calls may provide benefit to patients and improve outcomes.

Detailed description

This investigation will comprise a mixed methods, before-and-after study. The particulars are: Format: 1. Before intervention 1. Analysis of retrospective MET activity and patient outcome data 2. Surveying of staff for attitudes and perceptions of MET calls 2. Intervention 1. Twice-daily MET briefing meetings 2. Formalised handover process for MET calls resulting in patients remaining in their current clinical area 3. After intervention 1. Analysis of prospective MET activity and patient outcome data 2. Surveying of staff for attitudes and perceptions of MET calls Setting: Lyell McEwin Hospital, a 300 bed, university-affiliated, tertiary, metropolitan hospital located in Adelaide, South Australia. It has comprehensive in-patient medical and surgical services including a Level 3 Intensive Care Unit. Subjects: 1. Patients - adult in-patients attended by the MET during the study period. This will include patients attended more than once during an admission, as all calls will be a separate datapoint. It is also possible for patients to have more than one admission during the study period, so each admission will be considered discretely. 2. Staff - members of the hospital MET and ward staff that may call the MET. The MET composition is an ICU doctor, ICU nurse, medical registrar, intern and hospital manager. Due to rostering demands, this team is supplied from a pool of staff within each of the representative departments (approximately 10 ICU doctors, 30 ICU nurses, 30 medicine registrars, 36 interns and 8 duty managers). Data Collection: 1. Characteristics and Outcomes 1. Per-hospital admission data includes: age, gender, admission diagnosis, admission type, length of stay and mortality 2. Per-MET call data includes: reason for call, location, duration of call, interventions performed, disposition and mortality 2. Perceptions and Attitudes 1. Ward staff question including around interactions with MET, involvement during MET calls, experience of repeat calling and reasons for repeat calling 2. MET questions including around interactions with ward staff, involvement of ward staff during calls and resolution of calls.

Interventions

OTHERA communication and team-working intervention

Medical Emergency Team (MET) briefings and formalised handover between MET staff and patient care teams

Sponsors

University of Adelaide
CollaboratorOTHER
Lyell McEwin Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Inclusions \- Medical Emergency Team (MET) calls

Exclusion criteria

* Cancellation of the MET response prior to, or on arrival at, the location of activation * Calls to patients \< 18 years of age

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Multiple Medical Emergency Team calls per patient admissionMeasured at time of hospital discharge

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
MortalityAt time of hospital discharge
ICU admission rateAt completion of Medical Emergency Team call
ICU interventionsAt completion of Medical Emergency Team call

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Perceptions of Interactions between Medical Emergency Team staff and patient care teams1 yearBoth Medical Emergency Team staff and patient care teams will be surveyed separately

Countries

Australia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 18, 2026