IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0265485.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of a multi-faceted rapid response system re-design on repeat calling of the rapid response team

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Chalwin
  • Amy Salter
  • Jonathan Karnon
  • Victoria Eaton
  • Lynne Giles

Abstract

Background: Repeat Rapid Response Team (RRT) calls are associated with increased in-hospital mortality risk and pose an organisation-level resource burden. Use of Non-Technical Skills (NTS) at calls has the potential to reduce potentially preventable repeat calling. NTS are usually improved through training, although this consumes time and financial resources. Re-designing the Rapid Response System (RRS) to promote use of NTS may provide a feasible alternative. Methods: A pre-post observational study was undertaken to assess the effect of an RRS re-design that aimed to promote use of NTS during RRT calls. The primary outcome was the proportion of admissions each month subject to repeat RRT calling, and the average number of repeat calls per admission each month was the secondary outcome of interest. Univariate and multivariable interrupted time series analyses compared outcomes between the two study phases. Results: The proportion of admissions with repeat calls each month increased across both phases of the study period, but the increase was lower in the post re-design phase (change in regression slope -0.12 (standard error 0.07) post versus pre re-design). The multivariable model predicted a 6% reduction (95% confidence interval -15.1–3.1; P = 0.19) in the proportion of admissions having repeat calls at the end of the post redesign phase study compared to the predicted proportion in the absence of the re-design. The average number of calls per admission was also predicted to decrease in the post re-design phase, with an estimated difference of -0.07 calls per admission (equivalent to one fewer repeat call per 14 patients who had RRT calls) at the end of the post re-design phase (95% confidence interval -0.23–0.08, P = 0.35). Conclusion: This study of an RRS re-design showed modest, but not statistically significant, reductions in the proportion of admissions with repeat calls and the mean number of repeat calls per admission. Given the economic and workforce capacity issues that all health care systems now face, even small improvements in the RRS may have lasting impact across the organisation. For the potential interest of RRS managers, this paper presents a pragmatic, low-cost initiative intended to enhance communication and cooperation at RRT calls.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Chalwin & Amy Salter & Jonathan Karnon & Victoria Eaton & Lynne Giles, 2022. "Effect of a multi-faceted rapid response system re-design on repeat calling of the rapid response team," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0265485
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0265485
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0265485&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0265485?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0265485. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.