Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVES: To identify escalation success factors documented in care records of patients who triggered an Early Warning Score ≥ 7 in the ward, avoided an Intensive Care Unit admission and survived and compare these with ward patients who triggered an Early Warning Score ≥ 7, went to intensive care and died during their admission. METHODS: A multi-site, retrospective records review was conducted on 340 survivors and 50 non-survivors who were either admitted to, or who avoided intensive care. RESULTS: Non-survivors of deterioration tended to be older, earlier into their hospital admission, and had a greater number of co-morbidities at the time of their trigger event. Overall, superior care was observed in non-survivors when triangulating quality of care scores and escalation care quality metrics (escalation compliance, hourly observations, and medical re-evaluation). Survivors avoided an Intensive Care Unit admission through responding to ward management or being referred to a specialist team. However, 9.7 % (33/340) of survivors were still triggering at the time of discharge, and 54 % of these had either Covid-19 or a long-term cardiorespiratory condition. CONCLUSIONS: This study found differences in how clinical staff responded to patient deterioration between survivors and non-survivors. Although non-survivors received higher-rated care and met more escalation quality indicators, their poorer outcomes were likely influenced by more severe underlying conditions. Despite both patient groups having comparable scores, staff appeared to make nuanced judgments factoring in clinical concerns not captured by the score alone (success factor). IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Despite generating the same warning score values, there is wide variation in true patient acuity that only clinical staff can discriminate, and escalation protocols alone may not be advanced enough to address this subtlety.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.iccn.2025.104064

Type

Journal article

Journal

Intensive Crit Care Nurs

Publication Date

12/06/2025

Volume

90

Keywords

Clinical deterioration, Early Warning Scores, Wards