A realistic evaluation of Early Warning Systems and acute care training in Northern Ireland: findings and recommendations

Statement of purpose The purpose of this concurrent session is to present the main findings and recommendations from a five year study evaluating the implementation of Early Warning Systems (EWS) and the Acute Life-threatening Events: Recognition and Treatment (ALERT) course in Northern Ireland. The presentation will provide delegates with an understanding of those factors that enable and constrain successful implementation of EWS and ALERT in practice in order to provide an impetus for change. Methods The research design was a multiple case study approach of four wards in two hospitals in Northern Ireland. It followed the principles of realist evaluation research which allowed empirical data to be gathered to test and refine RRS programme theory [1]. The stages included identifying the programme theories underpinning EWS and ALERT, generating hypotheses, gathering empirical evidence and refining the programme theories. This approach used a variety of mixed methods including individual and focus group interviews, observation and documentary analysis of EWS compliance data and ALERT training records. A within and across case comparison facilitated the development of mid-range theories from the research evidence. Results The official RRS theories developed from the realist synthesis were critically evaluated and compared with the study findings to develop a mid-range theory to explain what works, for whom in what circumstances. The findings of what works suggests that clinical experience, established working relationships, flexible implementation of protocols, ongoing experiential learning, empowerment and pre-emptive management are key to the success of EWS and ALERT implementation. Each concept is presented as ‘context, mechanism and outcome configurations’ to provide an understanding of how the context impacts on individual reasoning or behaviour to produce certain outcomes. Conclusion These findings highlight the combination of factors that can improve the implementation and sustainability of EWS and ALERT and in light of this evidence several recommendations are made to provide policymakers with guidance and direction for future policy development. References: 1. Pawson R and Tilley N. (1997) Realistic Evaluation. Sage Publications; London Type of submission: Concurrent session Source of funding: Sandra Ryan Fellowship funded by the School of Nursing & Midwifery, Queen’s University of Belfast

Suitability of Crangonyx pseudogracilis (Crustacea : Amphipoda) as an early warning indicator in the multispecies freshwater biomonitor

Background. Biological monitors are increasingly important in 'Biological Early Warning Systems' (BEWS) for monitoring water quality. This study examines the freshwater amphipod Crangonyx pseudogracilis as a potential new indicator species when used in the Multispecies Freshwater Biomonitor (MFB). The MFB is an online continuous biomonitor which uses impedance conversion to record behavioural responses of vertebrates and invertebrates.

Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of intensive care admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that outreach and early warning systems (EWS) are an integral part of a hospital wide systems approach to improve the early identification and management of deteriorating patients on general hospital wards, the widespread implementation of these interventions in practice is not based on robust research evidence. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the impact of critical care outreach services on hospital mortality rates. Secondary objectives included determining the effect of outreach services on intensive care unit (ICU) admission patterns, length of hospital stay and adverse events. SEARCH STRATEGY: The review authors searched the following electronic databases: EPOC Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and other Cochrane databases (all on The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1996-June week 3 2006), EMBASE (1974-week 26 2006), CINAHL (1982-July week 5 2006), First Search (1992-2005) and CAB Health (1990-July 2006); also reference lists of relevant articles, conference abstracts, and made contact with experts and critical care organisations for further information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series designs (ITS) which measured hospital mortality, unanticipated ICU admissions, ICU readmissions, length of hospital stay and adverse events following implementation of outreach and EWS in a general hospital ward to identify deteriorating adult patients versus general hospital ward setting without outreach and EWS were included in the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data and two review authors assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. Summary statistics and descriptive summaries of primary and secondary outcomes are presented for each study. MAIN RESULTS: Two cluster-randomised control trials were included: one randomised at hospital level (23 hospitals in Australia) and one at ward level (16 wards in the UK). The primary outcome in the Australian trial (a composite score comprising incidence of unexpected cardiac arrests, unexpected deaths and unplanned ICU admissions) showed no statistical significant difference between control and medical emergency team (MET) hospitals (adjusted P value 0.640; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.16). The UK-based trial found that outreach reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.85) compared with the control group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from this review highlights the diversity and poor methodological quality of most studies investigating outreach. The results of the two included studies showed either no evidence of the effectiveness of outreach or a reduction in overall mortality in patients receiving outreach. The lack of evidence on outreach requires further multi-site RCT's to determine potential effectiveness.

Heart Rhythm UK position statement on clinical indications for implantable cardioverter defibrillators in adult patients with familial sudden cardiac death syndromes

Whilst the decision regarding defibrillator implantation in a patient with a familial sudden cardiac death syndrome is likely to be most significant for any particular individual, the clinical decision-making process itself is complex and requires interpretation and extrapolation of information from a number of different sources. This document provides recommendations for adult patients with the congenital Long QT syndromes, Brugada syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Although these specific conditions differ in terms of clinical features and prognosis, it is possible and logical to take an approach to determining a threshold for implantable cardioveter-defibrillator implantation that is common to all of the familial sudden cardiac death syndromes based on estimates of absolute risk of sudden death. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. © The Author 2010.

The evolution of the UK charity Statement of Recommended Practice: The influence of key stakeholders

In the early 1980s, a landmark study identified significant poor reporting practice in UK charities. As a consequence, a journey was commenced with the aim of improving accounting and reporting as a basis for enhancing accountability by charities. Much of this change has been effected through the publication of evolving Statements of Recommended Practice (SORPs) on accounting and reporting by charities. This paper analyses the evolution of the SORP through time using insights from stakeholder theory, and argues that the key stakeholders influencing the evolving SORP have been government and the accounting profession.

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement-a reporting guideline published in 1999-there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA ( Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and metaanalyses.