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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Enhancing active patient participation in nursing handover: A mixed methods study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore: i) the frequency and nature of patient participation in nursing handover and ii) patients' and nurses' perceived strategies to enhance patient involvement in nursing handover. BACKGROUND: Patient participation in nursing handover is important for patient-centred care, shared decision-making, patient safety and a positive healthcare experience DESIGN: A multi-site prospective study using a mixed methods design. METHODS: Between September and December 2019, nursing handovers were observed on ten randomly selected wards, followed by semi-structured interviews with patients (n = 33), and nurses (n = 20) from the observed handovers. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics for structured observations and thematic analysis of interviews, and triangulated to develop a greater understanding of patient participation in nursing handover. This study is reported using the Good Reporting of Mixed Methods Study guidelines. RESULTS: The median patient age was 77 years and 47% (n = 55) patients were female. Of the 117 handovers, 76.9% (n = 90) were conducted in the patient's presence. Patients were active participants in 33.3% (n = 30) and passive participants in 46.7% (n = 42) of handovers; in 20% of handovers (n = 18), the patient had no input at all. Active participation was more likely in women (vs. men), surgical patients (vs. medical patients) and when nurses displayed engagement behaviours (eye contact, opportunity to ask questions, explanations). Three major themes were identified from the interviews: 'Being Involved', 'Layers of Influence' and 'Information Exchange'. CONCLUSIONS: The main finding was that patient participation in handover was low and strongly influenced by a complex interplay of factors including patient and nurse preferences and perceptions. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Handover is an essential tool in the provision of safe patient care. Patients were able to actively participate in nursing handover when they understood the purpose and timing of handover and had rapport with nurses.

Increasing accuracy in documentation through the application of a structured emergency nursing framework: A multisite quasi-experimental study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine if the use of an emergency nursing framework improves the accuracy of clinical documentation. BACKGROUND: Accurate clinical documentation is a nursing professional responsibility essential for high-quality and safe patient care. The use of the emergency nursing framework "HIRAID" (History, Identify Red flags, Assessment, Interventions, Diagnostics, reassessment and communication) improves emergency nursing care by reducing treatment delays and improving escalation of clinical deterioration. The effect of HIRAID on the accuracy of nursing documentation is unknown. DESIGN: A quasi-experimental pre-post study was conducted and the report was guided by the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. METHODS: HIRAID was implemented in four regional/rural Australian emergency departments (ED) using a range of behaviour change strategies. The blinded electronic healthcare records of 120 patients with a presenting problem of shortness of breath, abdominal pain or fever were reviewed. Quantity measures of completeness and qualitative measures of completeness and linguistic correctness of documentation adapted from the D-Catch tool were used to assess accuracy. Differences between pre-post groups were analysed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and two-sample t-tests for continuous variables. Pearson's Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used for the categorical data. RESULTS: The number of records containing the essential assessment components of emergency care increased significantly from pre- to post-implementation of HIRAID. This overall improvement was demonstrated in both paediatric and adult populations and for all presentation types. Both the quantitative and qualitative measures of documentation on patient history and physical assessment findings improved significantly. CONCLUSION: Use of HIRAID improves the accuracy of clinical documentation of the patient history and physical assessment in both adult and paediatric populations. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The emergency nursing framework "HIRAID" is recommended for use in clinical practice to increase the documentation accuracy performed by emergency nurses.

Intensive care patients receiving vasoactive medications: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vasoactive medications are high-risk drugs commonly used in intensive care units (ICUs), which have wide variations in clinical management. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the patient population, treatment, and clinical characteristics of patients who did and did not receive vasoactive medications while in the ICU and to develop a predictive tool to identify patients needing vasoactive medications. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a level three tertiary referral ICU over a 12-month period from October 2018 to September 2019 was undertaken. Data from electronic medical records were analysed to describe patient characteristics in an adult ICU. Chi square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyse data relating to patients who did and did not receive vasoactive medications. Univariate analysis and Pearson's r2 were used to determine inclusion in multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 1276 patients in the cohort, 40% (512/1276) received a vasoactive medication for haemodynamic support, with 84% (428/512) receiving noradrenaline. Older patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.02; p < 0.001) with higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III scores (OR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03-1.04; p < 0.001) were more likely to receive vasoactive medications than those not treated with vasoactive medications during an intensive care admission. A model developed using multivariable analysis predicted that patients admitted with sepsis (OR = 2.43; 95% CI = 1.43-4.12; p = 0.001) or shock (OR = 4.05; 95% CI = 2.68-6.10; p < 0.001) and managed on mechanical ventilation (OR = 3.76; 95% CI = 2.81-5.02; p < 0.001) were more likely to receive vasoactive medications. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanically ventilated patients admitted to intensive care for sepsis and shock with higher APACHE III scores were more likely to receive vasoactive medications. Predictors identified in the multivariable model can be used to direct resources to patients most at risk of receiving vasoactive medications.

Implementation of a hospital-wide multidisciplinary blunt chest injury care bundle (ChIP): Fidelity of delivery evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Ineffective intervention for patients with blunt chest wall injury results in high rates of morbidity and mortality. To address this, a blunt chest injury care bundle protocol (ChIP) was developed, and a multifaceted plan was implemented using the Behaviour Change Wheel. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reach, fidelity, and dose of the ChIP intervention to discern if it was activated and delivered to patients as intended at two regional Australian hospitals. METHODS: This is a pretest and post-test implementation evaluation study. The proportion of ChIP activations and adherence to ChIP components received by eligible patients were compared before and after intervention over a 4-year period. Sample medians were compared using the nonparametric median test, with 95% confidence intervals. Differences in proportions for categorical data were compared using the two-sample z-test. RESULTS/FINDINGS: Over the 19-month postimplementation period, 97.1% (n = 440) of eligible patients received ChIP (reach). The median activation time was 134 min; there was no difference in time to activation between business hours and after-hours; time to activation was not associated with comorbidities and injury severity score. Compared with the preimplementation group, the postimplementation group were more likely to receive evidence-based treatments (dose), including high-flow nasal cannula use (odds ratio [OR] = 6.8 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 4.8-9.6]), incentive spirometry in the emergency department (OR = 7.5, [95% CI = 3.2-17.6]), regular analgesia (OR = 2.4 [95% CI = 1.5-3.8]), regional analgesia (OR = 2.8 [95% CI = 1.5-5.3]), patient-controlled analgesia (OR = 1.8 [95% CI = 1.3-2.4]), and multiple specialist team reviews, e.g., surgical review (OR = 9.9 [95% CI = 6.1-16.1]). CONCLUSIONS: High fidelity of delivery was achieved and sustained over 19 months for implementation of a complex intervention in the acute context through a robust implementation plan based on theoretical frameworks. There were significant and sustained improvements in care practices known to result in better patient outcomes. Findings from this evaluation can inform future implementation programs such as ChIP and other multidisciplinary interventions in an emergency or acute care context.