Rapid response system and mortality in intensive care unit: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Internal and Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-25 DOI:10.1007/s11739-024-03780-8
Tak Kyu Oh, In-Ae Song
{"title":"Rapid response system and mortality in intensive care unit: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea.","authors":"Tak Kyu Oh, In-Ae Song","doi":"10.1007/s11739-024-03780-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The beneficial effects of a rapid response system (RRS) on clinical outcomes in patients admitted to a ward have been established. However, the relationship between RRS implementation and clinical outcomes in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) has not yet been established. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether the RRS affects clinical outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. As a nationwide, population-based cohort study, all adult patients who were admitted to the ICU from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021 in South Korea were included. Patients in hospitals with an RRS formed the RRS group; those in hospitals lacking an RRS constituted the non-RRS group. In total, 900,606 patients admitted to the ICU were included in the final analysis. Among them, 365,305 (40.6%) were assigned to the RRS group, and 535,301 (59.4%) were assigned to the non-RRS group. After propensity score (PS) matching, a total of 454,748 patients (227,374 in each group) were included in the final analysis. In the PS-matched cohort, the RRS group showed 8% (odds ratio [OR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91, 0.94; P < 0.001) and 11% (hazard ratio: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.90; P < 0.001) lower in-hospital mortality rates and 1-year all-cause mortality rates than the non-RRS group, respectively. In addition, ICU readmission rates and the occurrence rate for adverse events during hospitalization in the RRS group were 3% (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95, 0.98; P < 0.001) and 21% (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.80; P < 0.001) lower than those in the non-RRS group, respectively. RRS deployment was linked to lower in-hospital and 1-year all-cause mortality rates, ICU readmission rates, and the occurrence of adverse events during hospitalization among ICU patients. The findings indicate that using the RRS could assist not only patients in the ward but also critically ill patients in the ICU.</p>","PeriodicalId":13662,"journal":{"name":"Internal and Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1235-1243"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internal and Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-024-03780-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The beneficial effects of a rapid response system (RRS) on clinical outcomes in patients admitted to a ward have been established. However, the relationship between RRS implementation and clinical outcomes in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) has not yet been established. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether the RRS affects clinical outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. As a nationwide, population-based cohort study, all adult patients who were admitted to the ICU from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021 in South Korea were included. Patients in hospitals with an RRS formed the RRS group; those in hospitals lacking an RRS constituted the non-RRS group. In total, 900,606 patients admitted to the ICU were included in the final analysis. Among them, 365,305 (40.6%) were assigned to the RRS group, and 535,301 (59.4%) were assigned to the non-RRS group. After propensity score (PS) matching, a total of 454,748 patients (227,374 in each group) were included in the final analysis. In the PS-matched cohort, the RRS group showed 8% (odds ratio [OR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91, 0.94; P < 0.001) and 11% (hazard ratio: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.90; P < 0.001) lower in-hospital mortality rates and 1-year all-cause mortality rates than the non-RRS group, respectively. In addition, ICU readmission rates and the occurrence rate for adverse events during hospitalization in the RRS group were 3% (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95, 0.98; P < 0.001) and 21% (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.80; P < 0.001) lower than those in the non-RRS group, respectively. RRS deployment was linked to lower in-hospital and 1-year all-cause mortality rates, ICU readmission rates, and the occurrence of adverse events during hospitalization among ICU patients. The findings indicate that using the RRS could assist not only patients in the ward but also critically ill patients in the ICU.

重症监护室快速反应系统与死亡率:韩国全国范围内的队列研究。
快速反应系统(RRS)对病房病人临床疗效的有利影响已经得到证实。然而,在重症监护室(ICU)中,快速反应系统的实施与患者临床疗效之间的关系尚未确定。因此,我们旨在研究 RRS 是否会影响重症监护病房重症患者的临床预后。作为一项全国性的人群队列研究,我们纳入了韩国从2019年1月1日至2021年12月31日入住重症监护室的所有成年患者。有 RRS 的医院的患者组成 RRS 组;没有 RRS 的医院的患者组成非 RRS 组。最终分析共纳入了 900,606 名入住重症监护室的患者。其中,365,305 人(40.6%)被分配到 RRS 组,535,301 人(59.4%)被分配到非 RRS 组。经过倾向评分(PS)匹配后,共有 454,748 名患者(每组 227,374 人)被纳入最终分析。在 PS 匹配队列中,RRS 组显示出 8%(赔率比 [OR]:0.92,95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.91, 0.94; P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Internal and Emergency Medicine
Internal and Emergency Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
258
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Internal and Emergency Medicine (IEM) is an independent, international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal designed for internists and emergency physicians. IEM publishes a variety of manuscript types including Original investigations, Review articles, Letters to the Editor, Editorials and Commentaries. Occasionally IEM accepts unsolicited Reviews, Commentaries or Editorials. The journal is divided into three sections, i.e., Internal Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Clinical Evidence and Health Technology Assessment, with three separate editorial boards. In the Internal Medicine section, invited Case records and Physical examinations, devoted to underlining the role of a clinical approach in selected clinical cases, are also published. The Emergency Medicine section will include a Morbidity and Mortality Report and an Airway Forum concerning the management of difficult airway problems. As far as Critical Care is becoming an integral part of Emergency Medicine, a new sub-section will report the literature that concerns the interface not only for the care of the critical patient in the Emergency Department, but also in the Intensive Care Unit. Finally, in the Clinical Evidence and Health Technology Assessment section brief discussions of topics of evidence-based medicine (Cochrane’s corner) and Research updates are published. IEM encourages letters of rebuttal and criticism of published articles. Topics of interest include all subjects that relate to the science and practice of Internal and Emergency Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信