A controlled trial of electronic automated advisory vital signs monitoring in general hospital wards.

OBJECTIVES: Deteriorating ward patients are at increased risk. Electronic automated advisory vital signs monitors may help identify such patients and improve their outcomes. SETTING: A total of 349 beds, in 12 general wards in ten hospitals in the United States, Europe, and Australia. PATIENTS: Cohort of 18,305 patients. DESIGN: Before-and-after controlled trial. INTERVENTION: We deployed electronic automated advisory vital signs monitors to assist in the acquisition of vital signs and calculation of early warning scores. We assessed their effect on frequency, type, and treatment of rapid response team calls; survival to hospital discharge or to 90 days for rapid response team call patients; overall type and number of serious adverse events and length of hospital stay. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We studied 9,617 patients before (control) and 8,688 after (intervention) deployment of electronic automated advisory vital signs monitors. Among rapid response team call patients, intervention was associated with an increased proportion of calls secondary to abnormal respiratory vital signs (from 21% to 31%; difference [95% confidence interval] 9.9 [0.1-18.5]; p=.029). Survival immediately after rapid response team treatment and survival to hospital discharge or 90 days increased from 86% to 92% (difference [95% confidence interval] 6.3 [0.0-12.6]; p=.04). Intervention was also associated with a decrease in median length of hospital stay in all patients (unadjusted p<.0001; adjusted p=.09) and more so in U.S. patients (from 3.4 to 3.0 days; unadjusted p<.0001; adjusted ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.03 [1.00-1.06]; p=.026). The time required to complete and record a set of vital signs decreased from 4.1±1.3 mins to 2.5±0.5 mins (difference [95% confidence interval] 1.6 [1.4-1.8]; p<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Deployment of electronic automated advisory vital signs monitors was associated with an improvement in the proportion of rapid response team-calls triggered by respiratory criteria, increased survival of patients receiving rapid response team calls, and decreased time required for vital signs measurement and recording (NCT01197326).

Impact of protocol watch on compliance with the surviving sepsis campaign.

PURPOSE: Clinical decision support systems are intended to improve patients' care and outcomes, particularly when such systems are present at the point of care. Protocol Watch was developed as a bedside clinical decision support system to improve clinicians' adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. This pre/post-intervention pilot study was done to evaluate the effect of Protocol Watch on compliance with 5 guidelines from the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. METHODS: Preintervention data on rates and time to complete the resuscitation and management bundles from the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and time to administer antibiotics were collected from intensive care units at 2 large teaching hospitals in the United States. Training on the Protocol Watch application was then provided to clinical staff in the units, and Protocol Watch was installed at all critical care beds in both hospitals. Data were collected on rates and time to completion for 5 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines after installation of Protocol Watch, and univariate analyses were done to evaluate the effect of Protocol Watch on compliance with the guidelines. RESULTS: Implementation of Protocol Watch was associated with significant improvements in compliance with the resuscitation bundle (P = .01) and decreased time to administer antibiotics (P = .006). No significant changes were achieved for compliance with the management bundle or time to complete the resuscitation or management bundles. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical decision support systems such as Protocol Watch may improve adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, which potentially may contribute to reduced morbidity and mortality for critically ill patients with sepsis.