Key result
Planned RCT tests if critical care outreach is noninferior to medical emergency teams for 30-day mortality.
Why the study?
The two most prevalent rapid response team constellations in the efferent limb, MET and CCOT, have not been previously compared in a clinical trial.
Does a nurse-led critical care outreach team (CCOT) compared to a doctor-led medical emergency team (MET) reduce 30-day mortality and serious adverse events in deteriorating hospitalized patients?
Population
Up to 2000 hospitalized patients experiencing deterioration triggering a rapid response call
Comparison
Critical care outreach team (CCOT) vs medical emergency team (MET)
Design
Single-centre non-inferiority randomized controlled trial with randomization at time of call
Follow-up
90 days
Authors
Loading...
First RCT comparing MET vs CCOT compositions; will clarify optimal rapid response team staffing if noninferiority is shown.
RCT (n=2,000)
Randomised at the time of the call
No
Does a nurse-led critical care outreach team (CCOT) compared to a doctor-led medical emergency team (MET) reduce 30-day mortality and serious adverse events in deteriorating hospitalized patients?
This study protocol outlines a randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of nurse-led versus doctor-led rapid response teams on mortality and adverse events in deteriorating patients.
Føns‐Sønderskov et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Clinical deterioration (n=2,000). Critical care outreach team (CCOT) vs. Medical emergency team (MET) was evaluated on Mortality at 30 days and the occurrence of serious adverse events. A planned randomized controlled trial will evaluate whether a critical care outreach team is noninferior to a medical emergency team for 30-day mortality and serious adverse events in 2000 patients.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: