Literature DB >> 21570762

The epidemiology and outcome of medical emergency team call patients treated with non-invasive ventilation.

Antoine G Schneider1, Paolo Calzavacca, Inga Mercer, Graeme Hart, Daryl Jones, Rinaldo Bellomo.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is normally limited to the Emergency Department, Intensive Care Unit (ICU), Coronary Care Unit (CCU) or High Dependency Unit (HDU). However, NIV is sometimes used by the Medical Emergency Team (MET) as respiratory support for ward patients.
OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the characteristics and outcome of ward patients treated with NIV in the setting of a MET Call and determined the clinical and prognostic significance of such treatment.
METHODS: We used our MET database to assess the characteristics and outcome of patients treated with NIV and compared them to a control group of patients with similar MET diagnoses but not treated with NIV.
RESULTS: We studied 5389 calls in 3880 patients. NIV was delivered during 483 (9.0%) calls to 426 patients (11% of the total). The four most common MET diagnoses associated with NIV were acute pulmonary edema (156 calls, 32.3%), pneumonia (84 calls, 17.4%), acute respiratory failure of unclear origin (59 calls, 12.2%) and exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (32 calls, 6.6%). Limitations of medical therapy (LOMT) were documented in 151 (35.4%) patients. Among NIV patients without LOMT, 115 (41.8%) were transferred to ICU and 50 (18.2%) to the coronary care or high dependency unit (CCU/HDU) compared with only 50 (18.0%) and 16 (5.8%) respectively in the control group (p<0.001). Overall, 76 NIV patients (27.6%) received endotracheal intubation (ETT) compared with 61 (21.9%) in controls. Mortality was 23.6% in the NIV group versus 18.8% in the control group.
CONCLUSION: One in ten MET call patients received NIV. In those without LOMT, two thirds were transferred to ICU/HDU/CCU, one in four received ETT, and one in four died. NIV use at the time of a MET call identified high risk patients for whom admission to ICU/HDU/CCU should be strongly considered.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21570762     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.04.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  4 in total

1.  Rapid response teams: a diagnostic dilemma.

Authors:  Andre Carlos Kajdacsy-Balla Amaral; Hannah Wunsch
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 7.035

Review 2.  Improving the Recognition of, and Response to In-Hospital Sepsis.

Authors:  Peter Chan; Sandra Peake; Rinaldo Bellomo; Daryl Jones
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 3.725

3.  Where is Noninvasive Ventilation Actually Delivered for Acute Respiratory Failure?

Authors:  Aylin Ozsancak Ugurlu; Samy S Sidhom; Ali Khodabandeh; Michael Ieong; Chester Mohr; Denis Y Lin; Irwin Buchwald; Imad Bahhady; John Wengryn; Vinay Maheshwari; Nicholas S Hill
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 2.584

4.  Predictors of Repeat Medical Emergency Team Activation in Deteriorating Ward Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Ju-Ry Lee; Youn-Kyung Jung; Sang-Bum Hong; Jin Won Huh
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 4.241

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.