Perioperative Medical Emergency Team (MET) call activation occurred in 7% of surgical patients and was associated with a significantly higher rate of ICU admission (49% vs. 3%, p < 0.001).
Cohort
No
What are the risk factors and outcomes associated with Medical Emergency Team (MET) call activation in surgical patients?
Age, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, and polypharmacy are significant predictors of the need for Medical Emergency Team activation in surgical patients, which is associated with increased ICU admission and longer hospital stays.
Absolute Event Rate: 49% vs 3%
p-value: p=< 0.001
BACKGROUND: As volume and complexity of surgical procedures increase, there is increased likelihood of perioperative physiological deterioration needing activation of Medical Emergency Team (MET) calls. AIMS: We aimed to estimate rate of MET calls in patients admitted for surgery and identify risk factors for perioperative activation of MET calls in a metropolitan teaching hospital with growing surgical acuity. METHODS: We identified risk factors for MET activation in a retrospective cohort study of a convenience sample of patients admitted under surgical services over a 3-month period and compared perioperative outcomes of patients who experienced MET call activation with those who did not. RESULTS: Thirty-three (7%, 95% CI: 5%-9.9%) patients required perioperative MET call activation. Patients needing MET activation were older (71 years vs. 49 years, p < 0.001), had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (median CCI 3 vs. 1, p < 0.001) and were more likely to be on five or more medications, polypharmacy, pre-operatively (58% vs. 21%, p < 0.001). MET call patients were more likely to require ICU admission (49% vs. 3% respectively, p < 0.001) and had a longer median length of hospital stay (median 10 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of MET call activation in patients admitted for surgery was 7%. Age, CCI and polypharmacy were significant predictors of need for MET activation (associated with need for escalation of care and poorer hospital outcomes). Since risk factors for MET activation were identifiable from data available at admission, there is potential to identify and intervene early in the perioperative period. Further work will determine whether intervention based on these can improve outcomes.
Dunduru et al. (Wed,) conducted a cohort in Surgical patients. Perioperative Medical Emergency Team (MET) call activation vs. No MET call activation was evaluated on ICU admission (p=< 0.001). Perioperative Medical Emergency Team (MET) call activation occurred in 7% of surgical patients and was associated with a significantly higher rate of ICU admission (49% vs. 3%, p < 0.001).