Rapid response teams halve hospital heart attack deaths

August 28, 2014 by Kenneth Hillman, The Conversation
Nation wide, rapid response teams save around 12,000 lives per year. Credit: AAP

Detecting and treating patients before they have a cardiac arrest isn't rocket science, but it's a life saver.

Rapid response systems identify deteriorating by abnormal vital signs and observations such as and high breathing rates. As soon as the patient is identified, there is a rapid response by staff experienced in caring for the seriously ill. The right person attends the right patient at the right time.

Research my and I published in the Medical Journal of Australia shows the scheme has reduced cardiac arrests and deaths associated with cardiac arrests in hospitals by about 50%. Nationwide, this saves around 12,000 lives per year.

The system was first developed in Sydney, Australia in 1990 and the proportion of NSW hospitals with rapid response teams more than doubled between 2002 and 2009, to 74%. Response teams now operate in most Australian hospitals, with slight variations.

So why did it take more than two decades to achieve such coverage? It comes down to the rigid ways in which hospitals historically operate.

An ageing system

Hospitals are the self-proclaimed flagships of medicine. That is where the majority of our health budget is spent and where technological advances have been made.

Hospitals have machines to support or replace most organs in the body; incredible advances in surgical procedures; amazing diagnostic tools; and the increasing use of interventional radiology to perform procedures such as stopping internal bleeding and opening up blocked blood vessels.

Ironically, all of these impressive developments are practised within a system which has not changed in more than a hundred years. Patients are admitted "under" a specialist doctor, who usually work with a team of trainee doctors. One senior doctor is ultimately responsible for the performance of their team and for the care of the patient.

This has advantages over the patient being cared for by a committee or administrator. But it has obvious disadvantages. Most hospitalised patients are now older with a whole range of age-related problems. They are more vulnerable and, at the same time, having complex interventions with high rates of complications.

The implementation of a rapid response system empower the bedside nurse. Credit: COD Newsroom/Flickr, CC BY

The "sick elderly" now comprise the majority of those in hospitals. They no longer neatly fit into one organ related speciality and are frail and at risk of deterioration.

Increased medical specialisation means that the deteriorating patient is often not recognised. Even if they were, the admitting team have become so specialised they no longer have all the skills and experience necessary to treat complex patients who are seriously ill.

A better way to prevent heart attacks

Before rapid response systems, a nurse would record abnormal vital signs such as a low blood pressure or high pulse rate but they were not empowered to act. They would seek the advice of the most junior member of the admitting team who usually did not have the experience to manage such complex patients.

The junior staff member would refer up the hierarchy, perhaps eventually to the admitting specialist whose expertise was not in acute resuscitation. So many patients had potentially preventable cardiac arrests or deaths. In other words, unwritten and embedded codes of practice would often trump patient care.

Rapid response systems now empower nurses at the bedside to bypass the rigid hierarchy and to advocate for the patient by immediately summoning for urgent assistance by a team trained in the management of seriously ill patients.

Admitting specialists have always been happy to have a cardiac arrest team attend their patients after the patient's heart had stopped. But about 80% of cardiac arrests in hospital occurred after a slow and predictable deterioration over at least eight hours. Even knowing this, there was initial resistance to having other specialists attending their patients apart from when they had a .

This resistance slowly disappeared and then another challenge emerged. The bedside nurses and the admitting medical team were so convinced that a rapid response system acted in their patient's interest, that the rate of calls increased to levels that were difficult for staff to sustain. The extra workload was a strain on intensive care resources who were often already overworked and under-resourced.

“The right person attends the right patient at the right time.” Credit: JillK61/Flickr, CC BY

There were also a minority of intensive care specialists who were reluctant to provide care outside of their own unit, despite patients in other wards being equally as ill as their own patients.

Most intensive specialists came to realise that all patients in a hospital are much more at risk than what they used to be and that it is often random whether a seriously ill patient is within the intensive care unit or in a general ward. In fact, the patients who are subject to a rapid response call are often more seriously ill than those in intensive care.

Toward patient-centred care

Rapid response teams are one of the first organisation-wide systems that has been constructed around the needs of a patient rather than geographical or professional silos. This may change the way we establish health systems. It's hard to go wrong if you construct a system around the needs of a patient.

We're now investigating how such a system might better respond to the needs of patients at the end of their life. More than one-third of all rapid response calls are for patients at the end of life. This means that hospitals find it difficult to recognise patients who may be dying.

It's important that we put into place more accurate ways of identifying patients at the end of life, even if it only means that we honestly explain the poor prognosis so that patients and their carers are able to plan their lives.

Just like rapid response systems, once the patient is identified as having a poor prognosis the response could be more appropriate than simply admitting the patient to an acute hospital. Patients and their carers could then be made aware of all the various options that are available so that they can make an informed choice.

Explore further: Survival increases with clinical team debriefing after in-hospital cardiac arrest

Related Stories

Survival increases with clinical team debriefing after in-hospital cardiac arrest

August 4, 2014
A new study found that staff members who joined structured team debriefings after emergency care for children suffering in-hospital cardiac arrests improved their CPR performance and substantially increased the rates of patients ...

Adrenaline does little to increase patient's survival after cardiac arrest

April 17, 2014
Giving patients adrenaline after they suffer a cardiac arrest outside of a hospital does not increase their prospects of surviving long-term, according to new research conducted at St. Michael's Hospital.

Triggers study evaluates regular staff, ICU specialists

July 17, 2012
A system of care focused on the detection and systematic assessment of patients with clinical instability can yield similar outcomes as rapid response teams staffed with trained intensive care specialists, a Beth Israel Deaconess ...

ICU fatalities linked to after-hours discharge

August 19, 2014
Patients who are discharged from intensive care units (ICUs) after-hours have a higher chance of death than those discharged during the day, a new study has found.

200,000 patients treated for cardiac arrest annually in US hospitals, study shows

June 24, 2011
More than 200,000 people are treated for cardiac arrest in United States hospitals each year, a rate that may be on the rise. The findings are reported online this week in Critical Care Medicine in a University of Pennsylvania ...

Hospitals' cardiac arrest incidence and survival rates go hand in hand

May 20, 2013
Hospitals with the highest rates of cardiac arrests tend to have the poorest survival rates for those cases, new University of Michigan Health System research shows.

Recommended for you

Could aggressive blood pressure treatments lead to kidney damage?

July 18, 2017
Aggressive combination treatments for high blood pressure that are intended to protect the kidneys may actually be damaging the organs, new research from the University of Virginia School of Medicine suggests.

Quantifying effectiveness of treatment for irregular heartbeat

July 17, 2017
In a small proof-of-concept study, researchers at Johns Hopkins report a complex mathematical method to measure electrical communications within the heart can successfully predict the effectiveness of catheter ablation, the ...

Concerns over side effects of statins stopping stroke survivors taking medication

July 17, 2017
Negative media coverage of the side effects associated with taking statins, and patients' own experiences of taking the drugs, are among the reasons cited by stroke survivors and their carers for stopping taking potentially ...

Study discovers anticoagulant drugs are being prescribed against safety advice

July 17, 2017
A study by researchers at the University of Birmingham has shown that GPs are prescribing anticoagulants to patients with an irregular heartbeat against official safety advice.

Protein may protect against heart attack

July 14, 2017
DDK3 could be used as a new therapy to stop the build-up of fatty material inside the arteries

Heart study finds faulty link between biomarkers and clinical outcomes

July 14, 2017
Surrogate endpoints (biomarkers), which are routinely used in clinical research to test new drugs, should not be trusted as the ultimate measure to approve new health interventions in cardiovascular medicine, according to ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.