Implementation evaluation of a rapid response system in a regional emergency department: a dual-methods study using the behaviour change wheel.

BACKGROUND: Failure to recognise and respond to clinical deterioration is a major cause of high mortality events in emergency department (ED) patients. Whilst there is substantial evidence that rapid response teams reduce hospital mortality, unplanned intensive care admissions, and cardiac arrests on in-patient settings, the use of rapid response teams in the ED is variable with poor integration of care between emergency and specialty/intensive care teams. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate uptake and impact of a rapid response system on recognising and responding to deteriorating patients in the ED and identify implementation factors and strategies to optimise future implementation success. METHODS: A dual-methods design was used to evaluate an ED Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS) protocol implemented at a regional Australian ED in June 2019. A documentation audit was conducted on patients eligible for the EDCERS during the first 3 months of implementation. Quantitative data from documentation audit were used to measure uptake and impact of the protocol on escalation and response to patient deterioration. Facilitators and barriers to the EDCERS uptake were identified via key stakeholder engagement and consultation. An implementation plan was developed using the Behaviour Change Wheel for future implementation. RESULTS: The EDCERS was activated in 42 (53.1%) of 79 eligible patients. The specialty care team were more likely to respond when the EDCERS was activated than when there was no activation ([n = 40, 50.6%] v [n = 26, 32.9%], p = 0.01). Six facilitators and nine barriers to protocol uptake were identified. Twenty behaviour change techniques were selected and informed the development of a theory-informed implementation plan. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the EDCERS protocol resulted in high response rates from specialty and intensive care staff. However, overall uptake of the protocol by emergency staff was poor. This study highlights the importance of understanding facilitators and barriers to uptake prior to implementing a new intervention.

Impact of an emergency department rapid response system on inpatient clinical deterioration: A controlled pre-post study.

AIM: To determine the impact implementation of Emergency Department Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS) on inpatient deterioration events and identify contributing causal factors. METHODS: EDCERS was implemented in an Australian regional hospital, integrating a single parameter track and trigger criteria for escalation of care, and emergency, specialty and critical care clinician response to patient deterioration. In this controlled pre-post study, electronic medical records of patients who experienced a deterioration event (rapid response call, cardiac arrest or unplanned intensive care admission) on the ward within 72 h of admission from the emergency department (ED) were reviewed. Causal factors contributing to the deteriorating event were assessed using a validated human factors framework. RESULTS: Implementation of EDCERS reduced the number of inpatient deterioration events within 72 h of emergency admission with failure or delayed response to ED patient deterioration as a causal factor. There was no change in the overall rate of inpatient deterioration events. CONCLUSION: This study supports wider implementation of rapid response systems in the ED to improve management of deteriorating patients. Tailored implementation strategies should be used to achieve successful and sustainable uptake of ED rapid response systems and improve outcomes in deteriorating patients.

Translation of evidence into policy to improve clinical practice: the development of an emergency department rapid response system.

BACKGROUND: Undetected clinical deterioration is a major cause of high mortality events in Emergency Department (ED) patients. Yet, there is no known model to guide the recognition and response to clinical deterioration in the ED, integrating internal and external resources. METHODS: An integrative review was firstly conducted to identify the critical components of recognising and responding to clinical deterioration in the ED. Components identified from the review were analysed by clinical experts and informed the development of an ED Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS). RESULTS: Twenty four eligible studies were included in the review. Eight core components were identified: 1) vital sign monitoring; 2) track and trigger system; 3) communication plan; 4) response time; 5) emergency nurse response; 6) emergency physician response; 7) critical care team response; and 8) specialty team response. These components informed the development of the EDCERS protocol, integrating responses from staff internal and external to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: EDCERS was based on the best available evidence and considered the cultural context of care. Future research is needed to determine the useability and impact of EDCERS on patient and health outcomes.