Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Standardized Process and Outcome Assessment Tool

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Textbook of Rapid Response Systems

  • 1052 Accesses

Abstract

The introduction and maintenance of a rapid response system (RRS) in a hospital, regardless of the hospital’s size, is an introduction of a complex change of system and as such poses many difficulties in the measurement of its possible success. Before embarking on a hospital-wide modification, opponent voices require hard evidence of the beneficial effects of such a system change. This raises the questions: how then do we best measure the effects of what we do and what tools do we have to assess our outcomes? Should we measure the process or the outcomes, or both? And what are the best outcomes to measure?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hillman K, Chen J, Cretikos M, et al. Introduction of the medical emergency team (MET) system: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9477):2091–2097.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Atkins D, Eccles M, Flottorp S, et al. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004;4(1):38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bagshaw SM, Bellomo R. The need to reform our assessment of evidence from clinical trials: a commentary. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2008;3:23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Winters BD, Pham JC, Hunt EA, et al. Rapid response systems: A systematic review. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(5):1238–1243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bell MB, Konrad D, Granath F, et al. Prevalence and sensitivity of MET-criteria in a Scandinavian University Hospital. Resuscitation. 2006;70(1):66–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Delaney A, Angus DC, Bellomo R, et al. Bench-to-bedside review: The evaluation of complex interventions in critical care. Crit Care. 2008;12(2):210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Peberdy MA, Cretikos M, Abella BS, et al. Recommended guidelines for monitoring, reporting, and conducting research on medical emergency team, outreach, and rapid response systems: An Utstein-style scientific statement: A scientific statement from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (American Heart Association, Australian Resuscitation Council, European Resuscitation Council, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa, and the New Zealand Resuscitation Council); the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee; the Council on Cardiopulmonary, Perioperative, and Critical Care; and the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research. Circulation. 2007;116(21):2481–2500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. DeVita MA, Bellomo R, Hillman K, et al. Findings of the first consensus conference on medical emergency teams. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(9):2463–2478.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hravnak M, Edwards L, Clontz A, et al. Defining the incidence of cardiorespiratory instability in patients in step-down units using an electronic integrated monitoring system. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(12):1300–1308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hillman K, Chen J, May E. Complex intensive care unit interventions. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(1 Suppl):S102–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. DeVita MA, Schaefer J, Lutz J, et al. Improving medical emergency team (MET) performance using a novel curriculum and a computerized human patient simulator. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14(5):326–331.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wallin CJ, Meurling L, Hedman L, et al. Target-focused medical emergency team training using a human patient simulator: Effects on behavior and attitude. Med Educ. 2007;41(2):173–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jones D, Bellomo R, Bates S, et al. Long-term effect of a medical emergency team on cardiac arrests in a teaching hospital. Crit Care. 2005;9(6):R808–R815.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nathens AB, Jurkovich GJ, Cummings P, et al. The effect of organized systems of trauma care on motor vehicle crash mortality. J Am Med Assoc. 2000;283(15):1990–1994.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jones D, Bates S, Warrillow S, et al. Effect of an education programme on the utilization of a medical emergency team in a teaching hospital. Intern Med J. 2006;36(4):231–236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen J, Flabouris A, Bellomo R, et al. The Medical Emergency Team System and not-for-resuscitation orders: results from the MERIT Study. Resuscitation. 2008;79(3):391–397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, 17176, Stockholm, Sweden

    Gabriella Jäderling

Authors
  1. Gabriella Jäderling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Konrad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriella Jäderling .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Dewey Street 125, Edgewood, 15218-1407, Pennsylvania, USA

    Michael A. DeVita

  2. Liverpool Hospital, Dept. Intensive Care, University of New South Wales, Locked Bag 7103, Liverpool, 1871, New South Wales, Australia

    Ken Hillman

  3. Dept. Intensive Care, Austin and Repatriation Medical Centre, Studley Road, Heidelberg, 3084, Victoria, Australia

    Rinaldo Bellomo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jäderling, G., Konrad, D. (2011). Standardized Process and Outcome Assessment Tool. In: DeVita, M., Hillman, K., Bellomo, R. (eds) Textbook of Rapid Response Systems. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-92853-1_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-92853-1_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-92852-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-92853-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation