Point prevalence of patients fulfilling MET criteria in ten MET equipped hospitals. The methodology of the RESCUE study

Abstract

Objective The RESCUE study examined the prevalence of patients at risk of a medical emergency in acute care settings by assessing the prevalence of cases where patients fulfil the hospital-specific criteria for MET activation. This article will detail the study methodology including the ethics applications and approvals process, organisational preparation, research staff training, tools for data collection, as well as barriers encountered during the conduct of the study. Design and Setting A point prevalence design conducted at 10 hospitals, comprising of private and public, secondary and tertiary referral, ICU equipped, metropolitan and regional settings. Patients All inpatients were eligible except intensive care and psychiatric patients. Measurement and main results On a single day consenting inpatients in each hospital had a single set of vital signs obtained, their observation chart reviewed and followed up for MET activations, unplanned ICU admissions, cardiac arrests and 30 and 60 day mortality. Of 2199 eligible patients, 1688 (76.76%) were assessed, 175 (7.95%) refused consent and 336 (15.28%) were unavailable. Access to patients was refused in some wards despite ethics approval. Data collection required 2 student nurses approximately 14 min per patient assessment. Conclusion In conducting a large multi-site point prevalence study, critical organisational processes were shown to influence the access to patients. This study demonstrated the impact of variation in Human Research Ethics Committee interpretations of protocols on consenting processes and the importance of communication and leadership at ward level to promote access to patients.