Skip to main content

All Content

Search Tips
Save
Selection
Format
Download
Published Date
Original Publication Date
Original Publication Date
PSNet Publication Date
Narrow Results By
1 - 6 of 6
Kitto S, Marshall SD, McMillan SE, et al. J Interprof Care. 2015;29:340-6.
Clinical staff often fail to call rapid response teams to evaluate deteriorating patients, even when objective criteria for calling the team are met. This qualitative study of physicians and nurses at an Australian hospital found that an impaired culture of safety can result in failure to use the rapid response team when appropriate and can also lead to using the team as a workaround to compensate for poor interdisciplinary communication.
Jones D, Baldwin I, McIntyre T, et al. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15:427-32.
Medical emergency teams (METs, also known as rapid response teams) are being widely implemented in U.S. hospitals. Although their effectiveness in preventing adverse patient outcomes is uncertain, a major proposed benefit of such teams is to provide support for nursing staff. This study, conducted at an Australian hospital with a long-standing MET, surveyed ward nurses to determine if they understood the appropriate reasons to call the MET and evaluate if they felt the MET improved patient safety. Nearly all nurses felt the team helped provide more effective care for patients and helped educate nurses in caring for acutely ill patients. Nurses did not feel that they would be criticized for calling the MET. Despite the presence of objective criteria (eg, vital sign abnormalities) for calling the MET, most nurses preferred to use their clinical judgment to decide when to summon the team.