An Early Phase 1 interventional study of Preemptive Rapid Response Team intervention in Heart Arrest, sponsored by University of Chicago. Withdrawn at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-04-07.
Sponsored by University of Chicago · Early Phase 1, Interventional, and Prevention
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of medical personnel in their ability to predict the likelihood of non-intensive care (ICU), ward patients to clinically deteriorate (defined as a cardiac arrest, unplanned ICU transfer, or unexpected death)via the use of a clinical judgement-based tool designed for this study, Patient Acuity Rating (PAR), to predict short-term clinical deterioration. We will compare the ability of this tool to predict clinical deterioration compared to accepted physiology-based tools and tools combining judgment and physiology as well as other markers of deterioration such as physician order changes. We will compare the sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve of these combined models to the predictive models including only physiology or clinical judgment. We will assess the correlation between specific physician orders and patient deterioration to determine whether specific clinical activities, such as emergently obtained radiology exams, predict impending deterioration. We hypothesize that PAR will be a useful tool for predicting clinical deterioration across the institution and that it will have a higher average accuracy for predicting clinical deterioration in non-ICU inpatients within 24 hours than the physiology-based tools alone. We further hypothesize that a combined metric which includes both the PAR and the individual physiologic components that comprise physiologic tools will not significantly improve prediction over the PAR alone. We further propose to use PAR to prospectively risk stratify patients for preemptive evaluation by the Rapid Response Team. We hypothesize that intervening on high risk patients by preemptively activating the hospital's Rapid Response Team (to assess and treat patients as needed) will decrease cardiac arrest rates and mortality.
965 studies on the registry are indexed under Heart Arrest; 226 are open to participants now.
Browse Heart Arrest studies →University of Chicago is the lead sponsor of 907 studies on the registry; 182 are open to participants now.
Of its 99 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 68 (69%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Other: Preemptive Rapid Response Team intervention
Non-ICU inpatients will be randomized on admission to an RRT surveillance group or standard of care. Daily risk prediction scores will be collected for all non-ICU inpatients. Those with high scores, who have been randomized to the surveillance arm, will be included on a list of patients, updated daily, that the Rapid Response Team will receive, with instructions to evaluate and intervene, if required, without waiting for formal activation by the usual channels.
Mortality and cardiac arrest rates
Non-ICU ward inpatients will be randomized on admission to an RRT surveillance group or standard of care. Daily risk prediction scores will be collected for all non-ICU inpatients. Those with high scores, who have been randomized to the surveillance arm, will be included on a list of patients, updated daily, that the Rapid Response Team will receive, with instructions to evaluate and intervene, if required, without waiting for formal activation by the usual channels. Outcomes for these patients will be compared to those with comparable risk scores who were randomized to the control group.
Time frame: 15 months
Length of stay
Time frame: 15 months
Cost
Time frame: 15 months
Time to ICU transfer
Time frame: 15 months
This study is withdrawn, as verified in Apr 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Chicago