2023 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation engages in a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation and first aid science. Draft Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations are posted online throughout the year, and this annual summary provides more concise versions of the final Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations from all task forces for the year. Topics addressed by systematic reviews this year include resuscitation of cardiac arrest from drowning, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adults and children, calcium during cardiac arrest, double sequential defibrillation, neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest for adults and children, maintaining normal temperature after preterm birth, heart rate monitoring methods for diagnostics in neonates, detection of exhaled carbon dioxide in neonates, family presence during resuscitation of adults, and a stepwise approach to resuscitation skills training. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces list priority knowledge gaps for further research. Additional topics are addressed with scoping reviews and evidence updates.

Maternity clinician use of shared decision-making in antenatal care: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of shared decision-making in antenatal care has had limited exploration. OBJECTIVE: To assess what is known about shared decision-making in antenatal care. SEARCH STRATEGY: Five databases were searched (1997-2022) limited to English language studies from OECD countries. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A data collection table was constructed with findings from 32 papers. A narrative synthesis was conducted with subsequent thematic analysis of included papers. MAIN RESULTS: Four areas of decision-making were identified with six themes revealing enablers and barriers to shared decision-making in antenatal care. CONCLUSION: Implementation of shared decision-making requires continuity, time and personalisation of care.

Understanding the influences on hospital discharge decision-making from patient, carer and staff perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Gaps in discharge planning are experienced by 41% of hospital patients in Australia. There is an established body of knowledge regarding the features of the discharge process that need to be improved to avoid subsequent hospital readmission and enhance the discharge experience. However, many of these studies have focused solely on factors related to unplanned hospital readmissions and there has been limited success in operationalising improvements to the discharge process. The aim of this study was to explore and describe the factors that influence the decision to discharge adult medical patients from hospital, from patient, carer and staff perspectives. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted in one acute medical ward in Melbourne, Australia. The study data were collected by observations of clinical practice and semi-structured interviews with patients, carers and staff. Participants were: i) English-speaking adults identified for discharge home, ii) patient carers, and iii) staff involved in the discharge process. Observation data were analysed using content analysis and interviews data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one discharges were observed, and 65 participants were interviewed: 21 patients, two carers, and 42 staff. Most patients (76%) were identified as being ready for discharge during morning medical rounds, and 90% of discharge decisions were made collaboratively by the medical team and the patient. Carers were observed to be notified in 15 discharges by the patient (n = 8), doctors (n = 4), or nursing staff (n = 3). Five themes were constructed from thematic analysis of interviews: Readiness for Home, Fragmented Collaboration, Health Literacy, Unrealistic Expectations, and Care beyond Discharge. A collaborative team and supportive carers were considered to enhance risk assessment and discharge planning, however fragmented communication between clinicians, and between clinicians and patients/carers was a barrier to discharge decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the need for a more coordinated approach to discharge decision-making that optimises communication with patients and carers and multidisciplinary workflows and reduces fragmentation. The importance of patient-centred care and a personalised approach to care are well established. However, there is a need to design systems to customise the entirety of the patient journey, including the approach to discharge decision making.

Acute Care Nurses' Partnership With Patients to Recognise and Respond to Changes in Patients' Clinical States: A Qualitative Study.

AIM: To explore and describe acute care nurses' partnership with patients to recognise and respond to changes in patients' clinical states. Acute care nurses' decisions to partner with patients to recognise deterioration in clinical states and to respond by activating a rapid response system improves patient outcomes. Acutely unwell patients can also experience clinical changes that include improvement and deterioration that does not trigger rapid response system activation over the course of hospitalisation from illness and treatment. How acute care nurses partner with patients in response to improvement and deterioration not triggering a rapid response system is not well-understood. DESIGN: An exploratory, descriptive study underpinned by Tanner's Clinical Judgement Model. METHODS: Using purposive and quota sampling, 20 nurses with direct patient care responsibilities on one medical and one surgical ward in a large Australian hospital were recruited. Nonparticipant observations followed by semistructured interviews were conducted between January and May of 2021. Nurse-patient interactions were observed for 4 h, and verbally described and recorded. Semistructured interviews were recorded and explored nurses' reasoning behind decisions observed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Three themes were identified from the data: nurses checking in for changes; nurses forming judgements; and nurses partnering with patients to respond. Acute care nurses promoted subjective assessment based on patients' safety risks. Patients' participation in response to changes was prioritised based on acute care nurses' judgement of safety. CONCLUSION: Patients receive significant safety benefits when acute care nurses partner with patients in response to their experience of improvement and deterioration during acute illness. Further research should evaluate the sensitivity of subjective cues in patient assessment. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: Partnership with patients in assessment and management of improvement and deterioration improves the quality and safety of patient care. Assessment frameworks should equally prioritise the use of objective and subjective cues. Nursing education should promote the safety benefits of patient partnerships in responding to patient changes. REPORTING METHOD: Equator checklist COREQ. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Data collected included description of patients' interactions with study participants.

Data-Driven Implementation Strategy to Optimise Clinician Behaviour Change at Scale in Complex Clinical Environments: A Multicentre Emergency Care Study.

AIM: To develop an evidence-driven, behaviour change focused strategy to maximise implementation and uptake of HIRAID (History including Infection risk, Red flags, Assessment, Interventions, Diagnostics, communication and reassessment) in 30 Australian rural, regional and metropolitan emergency departments. DESIGN: An embedded, mixed-methods study. METHODS: This study is the first phase of a step-wedge cluster randomised control trial of HIRAID involving over 1300 emergency nurses. Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data were collected via an electronic survey sent to all nurses to identify preliminary barriers and enablers to HIRAID implementation. The survey was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, which is a synthesis of behavioural change theories that applies the science of intervention implementation in health care to effect change. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data with inductive content analysis. Data were then integrated to generate barriers and enablers to HIRAID implementation which were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Corresponding intervention functions and Behaviour Change techniques were selected and an overarching implementation strategy was developed through stakeholder consultation and application of the APEASE criteria (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety and Equity). RESULTS: Six barriers to HIRAID implementation were identified by 670 respondents (response rate ~58%) representing all 30 sites: (i) lack of knowledge about HIRAID; (ii) high workload, (iii) lack of belief anything would change; (iv) not suitable for workplace; (v), uncertainty about what to do and (vi) lack of support or time for education. The three enablers were as follows: (i) willingness to learn and adopt something new; (ii) recognition of the need for something new and (iii) wanting to do what is best for patient care. The 10 corresponding domains were mapped to seven intervention functions, 21 behaviour change techniques and 45 mechanisms. The major components of the implementation strategy were a scaffolded education programme, clinical support and environmental modifications. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic process guided by the behaviour change wheel resulted in the generation of a multifaceted implementation strategy to implement HIRAID across rural, regional and metropolitan emergency departments. Implementation fidelity, reach and impact now require evaluation. IMPACT: HIRAID emergency nursing assessment framework reduced clinical deterioration relating to emergency care and improved self-confidence and documentation in emergency departments in pilot studies. Successful implementation of any intervention in the emergency department is notoriously difficult due to workload unpredictability, the undifferentiated nature of patients and high staff turnover. Key barriers and enablers were identified, and a successful implementation strategy was developed. This study uses theoretical frameworks to identify barriers and enablers to develop a data-driven, behavioural-focused implementation strategy to optimise the uptake of HIRAID in geographically diverse emergency departments which can be used to inform future implementation efforts involving emergency nurses. REPORTING METHOD: The CROSS reporting method (Supporting Information S3) was used to adhere to EQUATOR guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand; Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) number: ACTRN12621001456842, registered 25/10/2021.

Acute care nurses' decisions to recognise and respond to patient improvement: A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore and describe acute care nurses' decisions to recognise and respond to improvement in patients' clinical states as they occurred in the real-world clinical environment. DESIGN: A descriptive study. METHODS: Nine medical and eleven surgical nurses in a large Australian metropolitan hospital were individually observed during nurse-patient interactions and followed up in interview to describe their reasoning and clinical judgements behind observed decisions. Verbal description of observations and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The three themes constructed from the data were as follows: nurses checking in; nurses reaching judgements about improvements; and nurses deciding on the best person to respond. Acute care nurses made targeted assessment decisions based on predicted safety risks related to improvement in clinical states. Subjective and objective cues were used to assess for and make judgements about patient improvement. Acute care nurses' judgment of patient safety and a desire to promote patient centred care guided their decisions to select the appropriate person to manage improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of this research have demonstrated that the proven safety benefits of acute care nurses' decision making in response to deterioration extend to improvement in patients' clinical states. In response to improvement, acute care nurses' decisions protect patients from harm and promote recovery. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: Early recognition and response to improvement enable acute care nurses to protect patients from risks of unnecessary treatment and promote recovery. IMPACT: This study makes explicit nurses' essential safety role in recognising and responding to improvement in patients' clinical states. Healthcare policy and education must reflect the equal importance of assessment for and management of deterioration and improvement to ensure patients are protected and provided with safe care.

Importance of specific vital signs in nurses' recognition and response to deteriorating patients: A scoping review.

AIM(S): To explore the published research related to nurses' documentation and use of vital signs in recognising and responding to deteriorating patients. DESIGN: Scoping review of international, peer-reviewed research studies. DATA SOURCES: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Medline Complete, American Psychological Association PsycInfo and Excerpta Medica were searched on 25 July 2023. REPORTING METHOD: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. RESULTS: Of 3880 potentially eligible publications, 32 were included. There were 26 studies of nurses' vital sign documentation: 21 adults and five paediatric. The most and least frequently documented vital signs were blood pressure and respiratory rate respectively. Seven studies focused on vital signs and rapid response activation or afferent limb failure. Five studies of vital signs used to trigger the rapid response system showed heart rate was the most frequent and respiratory rate and conscious state were the least frequent. Heart rate was least likely and oxygen saturation was most likely to be associated with afferent limb failure (n = 4 studies). CONCLUSION: Despite high reliance on using vital signs to recognise clinical deterioration and activate a response to deteriorating patients in hospital settings, nurses' documentation of vital signs and use of vital signs to activate rapid response systems is poorly understood. There were 21studies of nurses' vital sign documentation in adult patients and five studies related to children. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: A deeper understanding of nurses' decisions to assess (or not assess) specific vital signs, analysis of the value or importance nurses place (or not) on specific vital sign parameters is warranted. The influence of patient characteristics (such as age) or the clinical practice setting, and the impact of nurses' workflows of vital sign assessment warrants further investigation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Nonpharmacological nursing interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia in acute and subacute settings: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia are a group of non-cognitive symptoms such as agitation, physical aggression, depression, sexual disinhibition and psychosis. Therapeutic approaches vary because of the multifactorial and complex symptomology. The researchers of this study aimed to systematically review the nonpharmacological interventions for BPSD used by nurses in acute and subacute hospital settings. DESIGN: The PRISMA guidelines guided this systematic review. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020184015). METHOD: The databases Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) complete, Medline complete, Excerpta Medica (Embase®) and PsycINFO published by the American Psychological Association (APA) were searched for studies published in English to October 2021. Quality appraisal was performed independently by three reviewers using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tools. Data were synthesized using a narrative approach. RESULTS: Two studies were identified that focused on interventions used by nurses; findings were positive for the use of nonpharmacological interventions to manage BPSD. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that nonpharmacological interventions are the best practices to manage BPSD. However, limited, and low-quality evidence suggests that further investigation is required to understand the factors contributing to the lack of use of nonpharmacological interventions by nurses in acute and subacute hospital settings.

Nurse management of noradrenaline infusions in intensive care units: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care nurse management of noradrenaline (norepinephrine) infusions is a common and essential clinical competency for patient haemodynamic support. Nurses titrate and wean noradrenaline infusions to a target blood pressure in a dynamic, high-risk, and unpredictable environment. Titration and weaning are complex interventions, and blood pressure goals are often variable. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to examine how nurses used blood pressure targets when escalating, weaning, and titrating noradrenaline in intensive care patients admitted for haemodynamic management and explore patient blood pressure responses to changes in noradrenaline doses. METHODS: In this naturalistic observational study, noradrenaline dose changes were classified as escalation, weaning, and titration changes and analysed to explore nursing practice. The study was undertaken in two adult medical/surgical intensive care units in Melbourne, Australia. Participants included intensive care nurses and patients who received noradrenaline infusions for haemodynamic support. RESULTS: Observations of 14 nurse-patient dyads provided 25 h of blood pressure and noradrenaline dose data. Patient participants received weight-adjusted maximum noradrenaline doses of between 0.06 mcg/kg/min and 0.87 mcg/kg/minute, with those in the escalation group receiving dose increases of up to 5 mcg to achieve blood pressure goals. During weaning, patients maintained or increased their blood pressure as noradrenaline doses were decreased. Nurses consistently maintained blood pressures at higher than target goals, and despite constant fluctuations, they only documented blood pressure readings hourly. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care nurses managed noradrenaline to achieve mean arterial pressure targets that were variable and not evidence based. The disconnection between observed blood pressure fluctuations and nurse documentation of patient blood pressures was reflected in titration practices. Discrepancies between documented and actual blood pressures raised issues about data used by nurses and doctors to inform clinical practice on noradrenaline management.

2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimizing pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the perioperative transition to specialty practice program.

AIM: To understand how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted nurse educators' and novice nurses' experience with the perioperative transition to specialty practice program. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with five perioperative nurse educators and five perioperative transition to specialty practice program participants from a major metropolitan health service in Melbourne. Data were collected between April and July 2021. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were identified. The value of the perioperative transition to specialty practice program in supporting novice nurses was recognized in the theme 'Nurturing our novices'. Widespread changes to clinical practice were demonstrated in the theme 'Every day is different', including changes to elective surgery, redeployment of staff and the transmission risk of COVID-19. 'The perils and joys of online learning' revealed both challenges and benefits of transitioning theoretical education from face-to-face to online delivery. 'Roller coaster of emotions' represented the heightened emotions participants experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 'Looking back to move forward' encompassed participants' reflections on the year, considering the challenges, adaptive strategies and the future of perioperative nursing education. CONCLUSION: The perioperative transition to specialty practice program was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants needed to adapt to rapid and frequent changes, which contributed to feelings of emotional distress, affected consolidation of clinical learning and reduced engagement with theoretical education. IMPACT: Perioperative nurses should acknowledge that opportunities for learning were decreased for transition to specialty practice program participants during the pandemic. Ongoing support and education should be provided, to nurture the future generation of perioperative nurses.

The influence of intensive care unit culture and environment on nurse decision-making when managing vasoactive medications: A qualitative exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Nurses working in intensive care units make autonomous decisions to manage high-risk vasoactive medications in critically ill patients. Noradrenaline (norepinephrine) is a vasoactive medication commonly administered to patients in intensive care units. The influence of unit culture and environment on nurse-decision-making on noradrenaline (norepinephrine) management is unknown. AIMS: The study aimed to investigate nurses' perceptions of the impact of interpersonal interactions, socialisation, and the intensive care environment on decision-making when managing noradrenaline (norepinephrine). MATERIALS & METHODS: An exploratory qualitative study applied thematic analysis to focus group data. A purposive sample of nineteen nurses participated in four focus groups at two intensive care units in Melbourne, Australia, from March to June 2021. The COREQ checklist was used to guide study development and no patients or members of the public were involved in focus groups. RESULTS: Three themes were generated from the researcher's interaction with data, Nursing and Medications; Culture and Decision-making; and a Safe Practice Environment. Nurses reported decision-making challenges associated with learning to manage noradrenaline (norepinephrine) early in their intensive care career and discussed feelings of isolation due to staffing resources, and the configuration of the intensive care environment. Nurses developed titration and weaning strategies to support decision-making in the absence of evidence-based algorithms. DISCUSSION: Empathetic patient allocation early in nurses' intensive care careers facilitated a safer learning environment, and reduced isolation inherent in single room intensive care units. Nurses developed and used titration and weaning strategies, often learnt from other clinicians to manage practice uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Management of noradrenaline (norepinephrine) is core business for intensive care nurses worldwide. Development of titration and weaning strategies by nurses indicated unmet need for guidelines to support decision-making. Identifying contextual elements that impact nurse management of high-risk medications can guide development of environments, resources and policies that support nurse decision-making, and reduce nurse anxiety and disempowerment.

Vital sign assessment and nursing interventions in medical and surgical patients with rapid response system triggers.

AIM(S): To explore vital sign assessment (both complete and incomplete sets of vital signs), and escalation of care per policy and nursing interventions in response to clinical deterioration. DESIGN: This cohort study is a secondary analysis of data from the Prioritising Responses of Nurses To deteriorating patient Observations cluster randomised controlled trial of a facilitation intervention on nurses' vital sign measurement and escalation of care for deteriorating patients. METHODS: The study was conducted in 36 wards at four metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia. Medical records of all included patients from the study wards during three randomly selected 24-h periods within the same week were audited at three time points: pre-intervention (June 2016), and at 6 (December 2016) and 12 months (June 1017) post-intervention. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the study data, and relationships between variables were examined using chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 10,383 audits were conducted. At least one vital sign measurement was documented every 8 h in 91.6% of audits, and a complete set of vital signs was documented every 8 h in 83.1% of audits. There were pre-Medical Emergency Team, Medical Emergency Team or Cardiac Arrest Team triggers in 25.8% of audits. When triggers were present, a rapid response system call occurred in 26.8% of audits. There were 1350 documented nursing interventions in audits with pre-Medical Emergency Team (n = 2403) or Medical Emergency Team triggers (n = 273). One or more nursing interventions were documented in 29.5% of audits with pre-Medical Emergency Team triggers and 63.7% of audits with Medical Emergency Team triggers. CONCLUSION: When rapid response system triggers were documented, there were gaps in escalation of care per policy; however, nurses undertook a range of interventions within their scope of practice in response to clinical deterioration. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Medical and surgical ward nurses in acute care wards frequently engage in vital sign assessment. Interventions by medical and nurgical nurses may occur prior to, or in parallel with calling the rapid response system. Nursing interventions are a key but under-recognised element of the organisational response to deteriorating patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nurses engage in a range of nursing interventions to manage deteriorating patients, (aside from rapid response system activation) that are not well understood, nor well described in the literature to date. IMPACT: This study addresses the gap in the literature regarding nurses' management of deteriorating patients within their scope of practice (aside from RRS activation) in real world settings. When rapid response system triggers were documented, there were gaps in escalation of care per policy; however, nurses undertook a range of interventions within their scope of practice in response to clinical deterioration. The results of this research are relevant to nurses working on medical and surgical wards. REPORTING METHOD: The trial was reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for Cluster Trials recommendations, and this paper is reported according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution.

Evaluating the efficacy of a digital App to enhance patient-centred nursing handover: A simulation study.

AIM: The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of a digital App developed to enhance patient communication with nurses during bedside nursing handover at shift change. METHODS: Six nurses and 11 patient actors/volunteers participated in 12 simulated nursing handovers across six simulation workshops. Over half the patients were aged 70+ years (55%); majority were female (82%). Handover video recordings were analysed using a structured observation tool and a revised Four Habits Coding Scheme to assess nurses' handover communication skills. Patient and nurse feedback was also sought. The STROBE checklist (Data S1) guided preparation of the study. RESULTS: For all simulated handovers (n = 12): Nurses greeted the patient at commencement; nurses made eye contact with the patient; patients were given opportunity to ask questions; and all patient questions were answered. Nurses explained the handover process for less than half the handovers (42%). Familiarity with the patient's history was evident in every handover. Communication behaviours identified in most handovers included: good nonverbal behaviour; allowing time for the patient to absorb information; giving clear explanations; involving the patient in decisions; and exploring acceptability of the care plan. Patient and nurse feedback on the App included: The App was easy to navigate, features were well-liked, with some improvements suggested. CONCLUSION: Patients and nurses provided positive feedback for the App during hospital stay and at handover. The App has the potential to enhance existing handover processes and increase safety of hospital care by using technology to educate and empower patients/carers to be active partners in communication with nurses during change-of-shift handover. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The App empowers and enables patients/carers to actively participate in nursing handover and allows patients to communicate concerns and provide information to their nursing team, facilitating a new approach. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and carers were involved in the research from the original co-design workshops that guided the development of the handover App. The research aims and outcome measures were informed by the experiences and preferences of patients/carers. Two patient representatives were involved in writing and submission of the grant application for the study to evaluate the efficacy of the App and were listed as co-authors on this paper. Patient volunteers were involved in the current study to pilot test the handover App. Patient volunteers were recruited through a consumer representative and volunteer registry at the health service. They participated in simulated nursing handovers with two nurses to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the handover App and then provided feedback and suggestions for improvement.

Clinicians' use and perceptions of the pre-medical emergency team tier of one rapid response system: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore clinicians' use of the pre-MET tier. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

The patient experience of a medical emergency team review: A convergent mixed-methods study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore clinician-patient engagement during, and patient experience of, medical emergency team (MET) reviews. DESIGN: This study involved a convergent mixed-methods design. METHODS: This three-phase study was conducted at two hospitals of one Australian health service. Reviews by the MET were observed for clinician-patient engagement behaviours; medical records were audited to confirm patient demographics and clinical characteristics; and patients who received a MET review were interviewed. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and thematic analysis of qualitative interview data was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 26 MET reviews were observed for 22 patients (median age = 81.5 years and 68.2% females). Between 8 and 13 clinicians and other staff members were present during each review, with a total of 209 clinicians present during the 26 reviews. Clinicians were not observed to speak directly or indirectly to the patient about their care in 38.5% (n = 10/26) of the MET reviews, and 58.3% (n = 56/96) of interventions were performed without explanation. Four themes were identified from the interviews: An unexpected event; A lack of understanding; In good hands, and What happens next? CONCLUSION: Clinician-patient engagement was infrequent during and after MET reviews. Patients experienced surprise from the sudden arrival of clinicians in their room and had poor levels of understanding about the review. However, most patients felt supported and safe. MET reviews are frequent safety-critical events, and this study identified the patient experience of these events. Clinicians should be aware that patients expressed they were surprised and shocked by the review and that an explanation of what was being done by the clinical team was rarely offered. These findings can be used to inform strategies to improve their patient-engagement behaviours and patient-centred care.

Frequency and nature of medical emergency team afferent limb failure in patients with documented vital sign abnormalities: A retrospective point prevalence study.

BACKGROUND: Medical emergency team (MET) afferent limb failure is the presence of MET triggers and the absence of a documented MET call. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to measure and understand the frequency and nature of MET afferent limb failure in patients with documented vital sign abnormalities in an Australian major teaching hospital. METHODS: A retrospective point prevalence study was conducted at a 600-bed teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Data were collected for all adult inpatients (aged ≥18 years) on 13 wards (three general medicine, three surgical, and seven specialist wards) during a randomly selected 24-h period. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: There were 357 patients included in the study, with a median age of 72 y. Of the 9716 vital sign measures extracted, 0.9% fulfilled patient-specific MET activation criteria. There were 93 MET triggers documented in 36 patients: 25 patients experienced MET afferent limb failure. The major issues related to MET afferent limb failure were MET trigger modification processes, resolution of vital sign abnormalities, alternative escalation of care, and limitations of medical treatment orders without specific modifications to MET triggers. CONCLUSIONS: Mandating MET activation for one aberrant vital sign at a single point in time warrants further assessment: lack of timely vital sign resolution may be a more appropriate trigger for MET calls and should be formally tested in future research. The frequency and effectiveness of alternative escalation pathways and local management of patients with MET triggers also warrant further investigation.

Development and Validation of the Medical Emergency Team-Risk Prediction Model for Clinical Deterioration in Acute Hospital Patients, at Time of an Emergency Admission.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a prediction model to estimate the risk of Medical Emergency Team (MET) review, within 48 hours of an emergency admission, using information routinely available at the time of hospital admission. DESIGN: Development and validation of a multivariable risk model using prospectively collected data. Transparent Reporting of a multivariable model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis recommendations were followed to develop and report the prediction model. SETTING: A 560-bed teaching hospital, with a 22-bed ICU and 24-hour Emergency Department in Melbourne, Australia. PATIENTS: A total of 45,170 emergency admissions of 30,064 adult patients (≥18 yr), with an inpatient length of stay greater than 24 hours, admitted under acute medical or surgical hospital services between 2015 and 2017. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The outcome was MET review within 48 hours of emergency admission. Thirty candidate variables were selected from a routinely collected hospital dataset based on their availability to clinicians at the time of admission. The final model included nine variables: age; comorbid alcohol-related behavioral diagnosis; history of heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or renal disease; admitted from residential care; Charlson Comorbidity Index score 1 or 2, or 3+; at least one planned and one emergency admission in the last year; and admission diagnosis and one interaction (past history of COPD × admission diagnosis). The discrimination of the model was comparable in the training (C-statistics 0.82; 95% CI, 0.81-0.83) and the validation set (0.81; 0.80-0.83). Calibration was reasonable for training and validation sets. CONCLUSIONS: Using only nine predictor variables available to clinicians at the time of admission, the MET-risk model can predict the risk of MET review during the first 48 hours of an emergency admission. Model utility in improving patient outcomes requires further investigation.

Recognizing and responding to clinical deterioration in adult patients in isolation precautions for infection control: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patient isolation is widely used as a strategy for prevention and control of infection but may have unintended consequences for patients. Early recognition and response to acute deterioration is an essential component of safe, quality patient care and has not been explored for patients in isolation. OBJECTIVE: The primary aims of this study were to (i) describe the timing, frequency and nature of clinical deterioration during hospital admission for patients with isolation precautions for infection control and (ii) compare the characteristics of patients who did and did not deteriorate during their initial period of isolation precautions for infection control. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted across three sites of a large Australian health service. The study sample were adult patients (≥18 years) admitted into isolation precautions within 24 h of admission from 1 July 2019 to 31 December 2019. RESULTS: There were 634 patients who fulfilled the study inclusion criteria. One in eight patients experienced at least one episode of clinical deterioration during their time in isolation with most episodes of deterioration occurring within the first 2 days of admission. Timely Medical Emergency Team calls occurred in almost half the episodes of deterioration; however, the same proportion (47.2%) of deterioration episodes resulted in no Medical Emergency Team activation (afferent limb failure). In the 24 h preceding each episode of clinical deterioration (n = 180), 81.6% (n = 147) of episodes were preceded by vital signs fulfilling pre-Medical Emergency Team criteria. Patients who deteriorated during isolation for infection control were older (median age 74.0 vs 71.0 years, P = 0.042); more likely to live in a residential care facility (21.0% vs 7.2%, P = 0.006); had a longer initial period of isolation (4.0 vs 2.9 days, P = < 000.1) and hospital length-of-stay (median 4.9 vs 3.2 days, P = < 0.001) and were more likely to die in hospital (12.3% vs 4.3%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients in isolation precautions experienced high Medical Emergency Team afferent limb failure and most fulfilled pre-Medical Emergency Team criteria in the 24 h preceding episodes of deterioration. Timely recognition and response to clinical deterioration continue to be essential in providing safe, quality patient care regardless of the hospital-care environment.