OBJECTIVES: To assess the characteristics of patients who died in a teaching hospital and the role of the medical emergency team (MET) in their end-of-life care. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 105 deaths over the month of May 2005 by a blinded investigator, who documented patient age, parent hospital unit, comorbidities, presence and timing of not-for-resuscitation (NFR) designation, and presence and timing of first MET review. We analysed differences between medical versus surgical patients, NFR versus non-NFR patients, and MET-reviewed versus non-MET-reviewed patients. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients who died, 80 were medical patients and 25 were surgical patients. Five patients were not designated NFR at the time of death, and three of these had antecedent MET criteria in the 24 hours before death. Of the 100 patients who were designated NFR at the time of death, 35 received a MET call during their admission. Of the 35 MET calls, 10 occurred on the same day as the patient's death, and 12 on the same day as the NFR designation. Documentation of NFR status occurred later in the admission for patients who received a MET call than for those who did not receive a MET call (mean +/-SD, 13.3 +/-16.1 versus 5.3 +/-10.8 days after admission; P = 0.003). Hypotension, hypoxia and tachypnoea were the most common MET triggers, and pulmonary oedema, pneumonia and acute coronary syndromes were the most common reasons for the deterioration in the patient's condition. Following the MET review, patients were admitted to the ICU and newly classified as NFR in 15 and nine of the 35 MET calls, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who died in our hospital were designated NFR at the time of death. A third of these patients were seen by the MET before death. In about 10% of cases, the MET participated in the decision to designate the patient NFR.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the characteristics of patients who died in a teaching hospital and the role of the medical emergency team (MET) in their end-of-life care. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 105 deaths over the month of May 2005 by a blinded investigator, who documented patient age, parent hospital unit, comorbidities, presence and timing of not-for-resuscitation (NFR) designation, and presence and timing of first MET review. We analysed differences between medical versus surgical patients, NFR versus non-NFR patients, and MET-reviewed versus non-MET-reviewed patients. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients who died, 80 were medical patients and 25 were surgical patients. Five patients were not designated NFR at the time of death, and three of these had antecedent MET criteria in the 24 hours before death. Of the 100 patients who were designated NFR at the time of death, 35 received a MET call during their admission. Of the 35 MET calls, 10 occurred on the same day as the patient's death, and 12 on the same day as the NFR designation. Documentation of NFR status occurred later in the admission for patients who received a MET call than for those who did not receive a MET call (mean +/-SD, 13.3 +/-16.1 versus 5.3 +/-10.8 days after admission; P = 0.003). Hypotension, hypoxia and tachypnoea were the most common MET triggers, and pulmonary oedema, pneumonia and acute coronary syndromes were the most common reasons for the deterioration in the patient's condition. Following the MET review, patients were admitted to the ICU and newly classified as NFR in 15 and nine of the 35 MET calls, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who died in our hospital were designated NFR at the time of death. A third of these patients were seen by the MET before death. In about 10% of cases, the MET participated in the decision to designate the patient NFR.
Authors: Judith E Nelson; Kusum S Mathews; David E Weissman; Karen J Brasel; Margaret Campbell; J Randall Curtis; Jennifer A Frontera; Michelle Gabriel; Ross M Hays; Anne C Mosenthal; Colleen Mulkerin; Kathleen A Puntillo; Daniel E Ray; Stefanie P Weiss; Rick Bassett; Renee D Boss; Dana R Lustbader Journal: Chest Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Michael D Howell; Long Ngo; Patricia Folcarelli; Julius Yang; Lawrence Mottley; Edward R Marcantonio; Kenneth E Sands; Donald Moorman; Mark D Aronson Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Nita Khandelwal; Ann C Long; Robert Y Lee; Cara L McDermott; Ruth A Engelberg; J Randall Curtis Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Gabriella Jäderling; Paolo Calzavacca; Max Bell; Claes-Roland Martling; Daryl Jones; Rinaldo Bellomo; David Konrad Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders; Jeroen Ludikhuize; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; M Sesmu Arbous; Evert de Jonge Journal: Crit Care Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 9.097