Comparison of an early warning score to single-triggering warning system for inpatient deterioration: An audit of 4089 medical emergency calls

Ahmed Khalaf, Zsuzsoka Kecskes, Ekavi N. Georgousopoulou, Imogen A. Mitchell

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

Abstract

Dear Editor,
Various studies have compared different track and trigger systems for their ability to identify patients at risk of deterioration,1 however, an optimal system is yet to emerge.2 The aim of this study was to compare a multi-parameter track and trigger system (Modified Early Warning Score [MEWS]), used in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT),3 with a single-parameter track and trigger system (“Between the Flags” [BTF]) used in New South Wales (NSW)4 and assess their timeliness in detecting patient deterioration 24 hours prior to a Medical Emergency Team (MET) activation. Although the systems differ in their analysis of a patient’s physiological state, the parameters tracked are the same (temperature (T), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and sedation/consciousness level). Assessing timeliness involved looking at each system’s ability to trigger a ward review prior to activating the MET.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)7-9
Number of pages3
JournalResuscitation
Volume154
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2020
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of an early warning score to single-triggering warning system for inpatient deterioration: An audit of 4089 medical emergency calls'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this