Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective Medical emergency teams (MET) are mostly led by physicians. Some hospitals are currently using nurse practitioners (NP) to lead MET calls. These are no studies comparing clinical outcomes between these two care models. To determine whether NP-led MET calls are associated with lower risk of acute patient deterioration, when compared to intensive care (ICU) registrar (ICUR)-led MET calls. Methods The composite primary outcome included recurrence of MET call, occurrence of code blue or ICU admission within 24 h. Secondary outcomes were mortality within 24 h of MET call, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and proportion of patients discharged home. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias from confounding factors between the ICUR and NP group. Results A total of 1343 MET calls were included (1070 NP, 273 ICUR led). On Univariable analysis, the incidence of the primary outcome was higher in ICUR-led MET calls (26.7% vs. 20.6%, p  = 0.03). Of the secondary outcome measures, mortality within 24 h (3.4% vs. 7.7%, p  = 0.002) and hospital mortality (12.7% vs. 20.5%, p  = 0.001) were higher in ICUR-led MET calls. Propensity score-matched analysis of 263 pairs revealed the composite primary outcome was comparable between both groups, but NP-led group was associated with reduced risk of hospital mortality (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35–0.91, p  = 0.02) and higher likelihood of discharge home (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09–2.2, p  = 0.015). Conclusion Acute patient deterioration was comparable between ICUR- and NP-led MET calls. NP-led MET calls were associated with lower hospital mortality and higher likelihood of discharge home.

Background Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of cardiac surgery. Factors such as cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic cross-clamping and surgical stress may precipitate renal hypoperfusion and ischaemia, inflammation and oxidative stress are associated with development of AKI. Albumin’s pharmacological properties and widespread availability have the potential to mitigate these factors. However, the effect of albumin on cardiac surgery-associated AKI is unknown. Objective To evaluate the impact of postoperative 20% albumin infusion on kidney function after high-risk cardiac surgery. Methods We designed an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial—the ALBICS study (ALBumin Infusion and acute kidney injury following Cardiac Surgery). A total of 590 patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery (combined procedure or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) will be enrolled into the study and randomly allocated to receive a postoperative 20% albumin infusion or standard care in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre and baseline renal function. The study fluid will be administered upon arrival in intensive care for 15 h. Patients will be followed up until 28 days after surgery or until discharge from the hospital. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who develop AKI in both groups. Secondary outcomes to be measured are proportions of AKI stage II and III, 28-day mortality, mechanical ventilation time and length of stay in intensive care and hospital. Conclusion This trial aims to determine if a postoperative infusion of concentrated albumin reduces the risk of AKI following high-risk cardiac surgery. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619001355167. Registered on 03 October 2019—retrospectively registered. https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378383 .

Nurse practitioner-led MET calls have been shown to improve clinical outcomes versus ICU registrar-led MET calls. However, the cost implications of a nurse practitioner-led MET call system is not known. We conducted cost analysis from the healthcare service perspective to compare the costs of nurse practitioner- and ICU registrar-led MET calls. A retrospective study of MET calls between 1 June 2016 and 9 March 2018 including patients with first MET call during their hospital admission. The cost analysis compared MET calls attended by nurse practitioners against those attended by ICU registrars. Inpatient costs for nurse practitioner- and ICU registrar-led MET calls. 1,343 MET calls were included in the full dataset with a mean cost per ICU registrar-led MET calls and nurse practitioner led MET calls of AU$19,836 (95 % CI: AU$15,778 – AU$23,895) versus AU$16,404 (95 % CI: AU$14,988 – AU$17,820) respectively and a difference of AU$3,432 (95 % CI: −AU$38 – AU$6,903, p = 0.053). In the propensity-score matched analysis, the mean cost per ICU registrar-led MET calls and nurse practitioner led MET calls was AU$19,009 (95 % CI: AU$15,439 – AU$22,578) and AU$13,937 (95 % CI: AU$12,038 – AU$15,835) respectively, with a difference of AU$5,072 (95 % CI: AU$1,061 – AU$9,082, p = 0.013). A 24-hour nurse practitioners-led MET call service would break even at 101 MET calls leading to ICU admissions per year. Nurse practitioners-led MET calls saved significant costs compared to ICU registrar-led MET calls. Assuming that the difference in costs is due to shorter ICU length of stay, a health service that receives more than 101 MET calls leading to ICU admissions per year can save costs with a 24-hour nurse practitioner-led MET call service. This study helps in identifying the healthcare services where nurse practitioners −led MET systems could be implemented to be cost saving from health service perspective.

Objective: Medical emergency teams (MET) are mostly led by physicians. Some hospitals are currently using nurse practitioners (NP) to lead MET calls. These are no studies comparing clinical outcomes between these two care models. To determine if NP led MET calls are associated with lower risk of acute patient deterioration, when compared to intensive care (ICU) registrar (ICUR) led MET calls. Methods: The composite primary outcome included recurrence of MET call, occurrence of Code blue or ICU admission within 24 hours. Secondary outcomes were mortality within 24 hours of MET call, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and proportion of patients discharged home. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias from confounding factors between the ICUR and NP group. Results: A total of 1343 MET calls were included (1070 NP, 273 ICUR led). On Univariable analysis, the incidence of the primary outcome was higher in ICUR led MET calls (26.7% vs 20.6%, p = 0.03). Of the secondary outcome measures, mortality within 24 hours (3.4% vs 7.7%, p = 0.002) and hospital mortality (12.7% vs 20.5%, p = 0.001) was higher in ICUR led MET calls. Propensity score matched analysis of 263 pairs revealed the composite primary outcome was comparable between both groups but NP led group was associated with reduced risk of hospital mortality (OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.35-0.91, p = 0.02) and higher likelihood of discharge home (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.2, p=0.015). Conclusion: Acute patient deterioration was comparable between ICUR and NP led MET Calls. NP led MET calls were associated with lower hospital mortality and higher likelihood of discharge home.