Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Consequences of Recurrent Activation of a Rapid Response Team: A Multicenter Observational Study

Implementation of a critical care outreach team in a children's hospital

Introduction

Proactive surveillance by a critical care outreach team (CCOT) can promote early recognition of deterioration in hospitalized patients but is uncommon in pediatric rapid response systems (RRSs). After our children's hospital introduced a CCOT in 2019, we aimed to characterize early implementation outcomes. We hypothesized that CCOT rounding would identify additional children at risk for deterioration.

Methods

The CCOT, staffed by a dedicated critical care nurse (RN), respiratory therapist, and attending, conducts daily in-person rounds with charge RNs on medical-surgical units, to screen RRS-identified high-risk patients for deterioration. In this prospective study, observers tracked rounds discussion content, participation, and identification of new high-risk patients. We compared 'identified-patient-discussions' (IPD) about RRS-identified patients, and 'new-patient-discussions' (NPD) about new patients with Fisher's exact test. For new patients, we performed thematic analysis of clinical data to identify deterioration related themes.

Results

During 348 unit-rounds over 20 days, we observed 383 discussions - 35 (9%) were NPD. Frequent topics were screening for clinical concerns (374/383, 98%), active clinical concerns (147/383, 39%), and watcher activation (66/383, 17%). Most discussions only included standard participants (353/383, 92%). Compared to IPD, NPD more often addressed active concerns (74.3% vs 34.8%, p < 0.01) and staffing resource concerns (5.7% vs 0.6%, p < 0.04), and more often incorporated extra participants (25.7% vs 6%, p < 0.01). In thematic analysis of 33 new patients, most (29/33, 88%) had features of deterioration.

Conclusion

A successfully implemented CCOT enhanced identification of clinical deterioration not captured by existing RRS resources. Future work will investigate its impact on operational safety and patient-centered outcomes.

Medical Emergency Team call within 24 h of medical admission with a focus on sepsis: a retrospective review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Clinical deterioration within the first 24 h of patient admission triggering a Medical Emergency Team (MET) call is a common occurrence. A greater understanding of these events, with a focus on the recognition and management of sepsis, could lead to quality improvement interventions.

METHODS

A retrospective observational review of general and subspecialty medical admissions triggering a MET call within 24 h of admission at a quaternary Australian hospital.

RESULTS

2648 MET calls occurred (47.9/1000 admissions), 527 (20% of total MET events, 9.5/1000 admissions) within 24 h of admission, with the trigger more likely to be hypotension (odds ratio: 1.5, P = 0.0013). There were 263 MET calls to 217 individual medical patients within 24 h of admission, of which 84 (38.7%) were admitted with suspected infection, 69% of which fulfilled sepsis criteria. Of these, 36.2% received antimicrobial therapy within the recommended timeframe and 39.6% received antibiotics in line with hospital guidelines. Sepsis was initially missed in 11% of patients. Afferent limb failure occurred in 29% of patients with 40.5% experiencing a failure of the ward-based response to deterioration prior to MET call. Median hospital length of stay was increased in patients admitted with suspected infection (7 vs 5 days, P = 0.015) and in those with sepsis not receiving antimicrobial therapy within guideline timeframes (9 vs 4 days, P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

There is a significant opportunity to improve care for patients who trigger a MET within 24 h of admission. This study supports the implementation of a hospital sepsis management guideline.

Preoperative sleep apnea screening protocol reduces medical emergency team activation in patients with atrial fibrillation

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The association of in-hospital medical emergency team activation (META) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at risk for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is unclear. This study evaluates the performance of the DOISNORE50 sleep questionnaire as an OSA screener for patients with AF and determines the prevalence of META among perioperative patients with underlying AF who have a diagnosis or are at risk for OSA.

METHODS

A prospective perioperative cohort of 2,926 patients with the diagnosis of AF was assessed for DOISNORE50 questionnaire screening. Propensity-score matching was used to match patients' physical characteristics, comorbidities, length of stay, and inpatient continuous positive airway pressure device usage. META and intensive care unit admissions during the surgical encounter, 30-day hospital readmissions, and 30-day emergency department visits were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 1,509 out of 2,926 AF patients completed the DOISNORE50 questionnaire and were enrolled in the OSA safety protocol. Following propensity-score matching, there were reduced adjusted odds of META in the screened group of 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.48-0.98, P < .001) in comparison to the unscreened group. The adjusted odds of intensive care unit admissions and emergency department visits within 30 days of discharge were statistically lower for the screened group compared with the unscreened group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among perioperative AF patients, evidence supports DOISNORE50 screening and implementation of an OSA safety protocol for reduction of META. This study identified decreased odds of META, intensive care unit admissions, and emergency department visits among the screened group. The high-risk and known OSA group showed reduced odds of META following the implementation of an OSA safety protocol.

CITATION

Saha AK, Sheehan KN, Xiang KR, et al. Preoperative sleep apnea screening protocol reduces medical emergency team activation in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(5):783-792.

Rapid response events with multiple triggers are associated with poor outcomes in children

Objective

We describe the characteristics and outcomes of pediatric rapid response team (RRT) events within a single institution, categorized by reason for RRT activation (RRT triggers). We hypothesized that events with multiple triggers are associated with worse outcomes.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective 3-year study at a high-volume tertiary academic pediatric hospital. We included all patients with index RRT events during the study period.

Results

Association of patient and RRT event characteristics with outcomes including transfers to ICU, need for advanced cardiopulmonary support, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality were studied. We reviewed 2,267 RRT events from 2,088 patients. Most (59%) were males with a median age of 2 years and 57% had complex chronic conditions. RRT triggers were: respiratory (36%) and multiple (35%). Transfer to the ICU occurred after 1,468 events (70%). Median hospital and ICU LOS were 11 and 1 days. Need for advanced cardiopulmonary support was noted in 291 events (14%). Overall mortality was 85 (4.1%), with 61 (2.9%) of patients having cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA). Multiple RRT trigger events were associated with transfer to the ICU (559 events; OR 1.48; p < 0.001), need for advanced cardiopulmonary support (134 events; OR 1.68; p < 0.001), CPA (34 events; OR 2.36; p = 0.001), and longer ICU LOS (2 vs. 1 days; p < 0.001). All categories of triggers have lower odds of need for advanced cardiopulmonary support than multiple triggers (OR 1.73; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

RRT events with multiple triggers were associated with cardiopulmonary arrest, transfer to ICU, need for cardiopulmonary support, and longer ICU LOS. Knowledge of these associations can guide clinical decisions, care planning, and resource allocation.

Rapid Response Team Activation Triggers in Adults and Children: An Integrative Review

PURPOSE

This integrative review aims to identify the triggers for rapid response team (RRT) activation and their outcomes in pediatric patients and to compare them with those of adult patients. In addition, this integrative review synthesizes the outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay, and mortality following RRT activation.

METHOD

An integrative review using the Whittemore and Knafl methodology was undertaken with a search of three large databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and CINAHL) and found 25 relevant studies published in the years 2017 through 2022.

RESULTS

Tachypnea, decreased oxygen saturation, tachycardia, changes in blood pressure, and level of consciousness were the most common triggers in both populations. However, specific activation triggers differed between children and adults.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common triggers for RRT are detectable through vital signs monitoring; therefore, vigilant tracking of patients' vital signs is critical and can provide early clues to clinical deterioration.

Exploration of a rapid response team model of care: A descriptive dual methods study

BACKGROUND

Avoidable in-patient clinical deterioration results in serious adverse events and up to 80% are preventable. Rapid response systems allow early recognition and response to clinical deterioration.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the characteristics of a collaborative rapid response team model.

DESIGN

Dual methodology was used for this descriptive study.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a 500-bed tertiary referral hospital (Sydney, Australia).

PARTICIPANTS

Inpatients (>17 years) who received a rapid response team activation were included in an electronic medical audit. Participants were rapid response team members and nurses and medical doctors in two in-patient wards.

METHODS

A 12-month (January-December 2018) retrospective electronic health record audit and semi-structured interviews with nurses and medical doctors (July-August 2019) were conducted. Descriptive statistics summarised audit data. Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The rapid response team consulted for 2195 patients. Mean patient age was 67.9 years, and 46% of the sample was female. Activations (n = 4092) occurred most often in general medicine (n = 1124, 70.8%) units. Overall, 117 patients had >5 activations. The themes synthesised from interviews were i) managing patient deterioration before arrival of the rapid response team; ii) collaboratively managing patient deterioration at the bedside; iii) rapid response team guidance at the bedside; and iv) 'staff concern' rapid response activation.

CONCLUSIONS

Some patients received many activations, however few required treatment in critical care. The rapid response model was collaborative and supportive. The themes revealed a focus on patient safety, optimising early detection, and management of patient deterioration.

Predictors of Repeat Medical Emergency Team Activation in Deteriorating Ward Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Recurrent clinical deterioration and repeat medical emergency team (MET) activation are common and associated with high in-hospital mortality. This study assessed the predictors for repeat MET activation in deteriorating patients admitted to a general ward. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 5512 consecutive deteriorating hospitalized adult patients who required MET activation in the general ward. The patients were divided into two groups according to repeat MET activation. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify the predictors for repeat MET activation. Hematological malignancies (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-2.79) and chronic lung disease (1.49; 1.07-2.06) were associated with a high risk of repeat MET activation. Among the causes for MET activation, respiratory distress (1.76; 1.19-2.60) increased the risk of repeat MET activation. A low oxygen saturation-to-fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (0.97; 0.95-0.98), high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (4.52; 3.56-5.74), airway suctioning (4.63; 3.59-5.98), noninvasive mechanical ventilation (1.52; 1.07-2.68), and vasopressor support (1.76; 1.22-2.54) at first MET activation increased the risk of repeat MET activation. The risk factors identified in this study may be useful to identify patients at risk of repeat MET activation at the first MET activation. This would allow the classification of high-risk patients and the application of aggressive interventions to improve outcomes.

Early warning systems and rapid response systems for the prevention of patient deterioration on acute adult hospital wards

BACKGROUND

Early warning systems (EWS) and rapid response systems (RRS) have been implemented internationally in acute hospitals to facilitate early recognition, referral and response to patient deterioration as a solution to address suboptimal ward-based care. EWS and RRS facilitate healthcare decision-making using checklists and provide structure to organisational practices through governance and clinical audit. However, it is unclear whether these systems improve patient outcomes. This is the first update of a previously published (2007) Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of EWS and RRS implementation on adults who deteriorate on acute hospital wards compared to people receiving hospital care without EWS and RRS in place.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trial registers on 28 March 2019. We subsequently ran a MEDLINE update on 15 May 2020 that identified no further studies. We checked references of included studies, conducted citation searching, and contacted experts and critical care organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, non-randomised studies, controlled before-after (CBA) studies, and interrupted time series (ITS) designs measuring our outcomes of interest following implementation of EWS and RRS in acute hospital wards compared to ward settings without EWS and RRS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed methodological quality using standard Cochrane and Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group methods. Where possible, we standardised data to rates per 1000 admissions; and calculated risk differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Newcombe and Altman method. We reanalysed three CBA studies as ITS designs using segmented regression analysis with Newey-West autocorrelation adjusted standard errors with lag of order 1. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomised trials (455,226 participants) and seven non-randomised studies (210,905 participants reported in three studies). All 11 studies implemented an intervention comprising an EWS and RRS conducted in high- or middle-income countries. Participants were admitted to 282 acute hospitals. We were unable to perform meta-analyses due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity across studies. Randomised trials were assessed as high risk of bias due to lack of blinding participants and personnel across all studies. Risk of bias for non-randomised studies was critical (three studies) due to high risk of confounding and unclear risk of bias due to no reporting of deviation from protocol or serious (four studies) but not critical due to use of statistical methods to control for some but not all baseline confounders. Where possible we presented original study data which reported the adjusted relative effect given these were appropriately adjusted for design and participant characteristics. We compared outcomes of randomised and non-randomised studies reported them separately to determine which studies contributed to the overall certainty of evidence. We reported findings from key comparisons. Hospital mortality Randomised trials provided low-certainty evidence that an EWS and RRS intervention may result in little or no difference in hospital mortality (4 studies, 455,226 participants; results not pooled). The evidence on hospital mortality from three non-randomised studies was of very low certainty (210,905 participants). Composite outcome (unexpected cardiac arrests, unplanned ICU admissions and death) One randomised study showed that an EWS and RRS intervention probably results in no difference in this composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16; 364,094 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One non-randomised study suggests that implementation of an EWS and RRS intervention may slightly reduce this composite outcome (aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.99; 57,858 participants; low-certainty evidence). Unplanned ICU admissions Randomised trials provided low-certainty evidence that an EWS and RRS intervention may result in little or no difference in unplanned ICU admissions (3 studies, 452,434 participants; results not pooled). The evidence from one non-randomised study is of very low certainty (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.02; 57,858 participants). ICU readmissions No studies reported this outcome. Length of hospital stay Randomised trials provided low-certainty evidence that an EWS and RRS intervention may have little or no effect on hospital length of stay (2 studies, 21,417 participants; results not pooled). Adverse events (unexpected cardiac or respiratory arrest) Randomised trials provided low-certainty evidence that an EWS and RRS intervention may result in little or no difference in adverse events (3 studies, 452,434 participants; results not pooled). The evidence on adverse events from three non-randomised studies (210,905 participants) is very uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the low-to-very low certainty evidence for all outcomes from non-randomised studies, we have drawn our conclusions from the randomised evidence. This evidence provides low-certainty evidence that EWS and RRS may lead to little or no difference in hospital mortality, unplanned ICU admissions, length of hospital stay or adverse events; and moderate-certainty evidence of little to no difference on composite outcome. The evidence from this review update highlights the diversity in outcome selection and poor methodological quality of most studies investigating EWS and RRS. As a result, no strong recommendations can be made regarding the effectiveness of EWS and RRS based on the evidence currently available. There is a need for development of a patient-informed core outcome set comprising clear and consistent definitions and recommendations for measurement as well as EWS and RRS interventions conforming to a standard to facilitate meaningful comparison and future meta-analyses.

Triggers and Interventions of Patients Who Require Medical Emergency Team Reviews: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Single Versus Multiple Reviews

BACKGROUND

Medical emergency teams constitute part of the escalation protocol of early warning systems in many hospitals. The literature indicates that medical emergency teams may reduce hospital mortality and cardiac arrest. A greater understanding of pathways of patients who experience multiple medical emergency team reviews will inform clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

To explore differences between patients who require a single medical emergency team review and those who require multiple reviews, and to identify any differences between patients who were reviewed only once during admission and patients who required multiple reviews.

METHODS

Data for this retrospective cross-sectional review, including demographic data, call triggers, outcomes, and interventions, were routinely collected from January 2013 through December 2015. The study adhered to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) collaborative's cross-sectional studies checklist (version 4).

RESULTS

Of 54 787 admitted patients, 1274 (2%) required a call to a medical emergency team; of those, 260 patients (20%) needed multiple calls. Patients requiring multiple calls demonstrated higher mortality (odds ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.12-1.98]). A logistic regression model identified surgical patients and those receiving antibiotics and respiratory interventions at the first medical emergency team review as being more likely to require multiple reviews. Patients transferred to a higher level of care after the first review were less likely to require another review.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients requiring multiple medical emergency team reviews have higher mortality. Surgical patients have a higher risk of requiring multiple reviews. Hospitals need to include more details on surgical patients when auditing medical emergency team activation.

ICU-free days as a more sensitive primary outcome for clinical trials in critically ill pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to assess the association between intensive care unit (ICU)-free days and patient outcomes in pediatric prehospital care and to evaluate whether ICU-free days is a more sensitive outcome measure for emergency medical services research in this population.

METHODS

This study used data from a previous pediatric prehospital trial. The original study enrolled patients ≤12 years of age and compared bag-valve-mask-ventilation (BVM) versus endotracheal intubation (ETI) during prehospital resuscitation. For the current study, we defined ICU-free days as 30 minus the number of days in the ICU (range, 0-30 days) and assigned 0 ICU-free days for death within 30 days. We compared ICU-free days between the original study treatment groups (BVM vs ETI) and with the original trial outcomes of survival to hospital discharge and Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (PCPC).

RESULTS

Median ICU-free days for the BVM group (n = 404) versus ETI group (n = 416) was not statistically different: 0 ICU-free days (interquartile range, 0-10) versus 0 (0-0), P = 0.219. Median ICU-free days were greater for BVM group in 3 subgroups: foreign body aspiration 30 (0-30) versus 0 (0-21), P = 0.028; child maltreatment 0 (0-14.2) versus 0 (0-0), P = 0.004; and respiratory arrest 25 (1-29) versus 7.5 (0-27.7), P = 0.015. In the original trial, neither survival nor PCPC demonstrated differences in all 3 subgroups-survival was greater with BVM for child maltreatment and respiratory arrest and favorable PCPC was greater with BVM for foreign body aspiration. Overall, in the current study, patients with more ICU-free days also had greater survival to hospital discharge and more favorable PCPC scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This initial study of the association between ICU-free days and patient outcomes during prehospital pediatric resuscitation appears to support the use of ICU-free days as a clinical endpoint in this population. ICU-free days may be more sensitive than either mortality or PCPC alone while capturing aspects of both measures.

Risk Factors for Early Medical Emergency Team Reactivation in Hospitalized Patients

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate the risk factors for early medical emergency team reactivation (which is defined as repeated medical emergency team calls within 72 hr after the index medical emergency team call) in the patients remaining on the ward after index medical emergency team activation.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis with prospectively collected data.

SETTING

A university-affiliated, tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

All consecutive patients over 18 years old who received medical emergency team intervention.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of the 3,989 cases eligible for analysis, 514 cases (12.9%) were classified into the reactivation group, with the remainder assigned to the nonreactivation group. In a multivariate analysis, chronic lung disease (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.03-1.86; p = 0.032), chronic liver disease (odds ratio, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.04-1.99; p = 0.028), activation due to bedside concern about overall deterioration without abnormal physiological variables (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.00-1.68; p = 0.049), advice or consultation only for medical emergency team intervention (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63-0.97; p = 0.027), and discussion about treatment limitation (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.25-0.60; p < 0.001) were independently associated with medical emergency team reactivation. In the reactivation group, 249 patients (48.5%) were transferred to the ICU after repeated calls. Medical department admission (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.12-2.52; p = 0.012), chronic liver disease (odds ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.07-2.79; p = 0.025), hematological malignancies (odds ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.41; p = 0.015), and tachypnea at the end of medical emergency team were risk factors for medical emergency team reactivation requiring ICU admission. Discussion about treatment limitation (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.40; p < 0.001) was also associated with decreased risk of medical emergency team reactivation requiring ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk of early medical emergency team reactivation was associated with medical emergency team activation by bedside concern about overall deterioration and patients with chronic lung or liver disease.

Predictors of mortality and cost among surgical patients requiring rapid response team activation

Background

Prior studies of rapid response team (RRT) implementation for surgical patients have demonstrated mixed results with respect to reductions in poor outcomes. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality and hospital costs among surgical inpatients requiring RRT activation.

Methods

We analyzed data prospectively collected from May 2012 to May 2016 at The Ottawa Hospital. We included patients who were at least 18 years of age, who were admitted to hospital, who received either preoperative or postoperative care, and and who required RRT activation. We created a multivariable logistic regression model to describe mortality predictors and a multivariable generalized linear model to describe cost predictors.

Results

We included 1507 patients. The in-hospital mortality rate was 15.9%. The patient-related factors most strongly associated with mortality included an Elixhauser Comorbidity Index score of 20 or higher (odds ratio [OR] 3.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.96-6.60) and care designations excluding admission to the intensive care unit and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR 3.52, 95% CI 2.25-5.52). The strongest surgical predictors included neurosurgical admission (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.17-3.75), emergent surgery (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.37-3.03) and occurrence of 2 or more operations (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.21-2.46). Among RRT factors, occurrence of 2 or more RRT assessments (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44-2.80) conferred the highest mortality. Increased cost was strongly associated with admitting service, multiple surgeries, multiple RRT assessments and medical comorbidity.

Conclusion

RRT activation among surgical inpatients identifies a population at high risk of death. We identified several predictors of mortality and cost, which represent opportunities for future quality improvement and patient safety initiatives.

Outcomes of hospitalized hematologic oncology patients receiving rapid response system activation for acute deterioration

BACKGROUND

Patients with hematologic malignancies who are admitted to hospital are at increased risk of deterioration and death. Rapid response systems (RRSs) respond to hospitalized patients who clinically deteriorate. We sought to describe the characteristics and outcomes of hematologic oncology inpatients requiring rapid response system (RRS) activation, and to determine the prognostic accuracy of the SIRS and qSOFA criteria for in-hospital mortality of hematologic oncology patients with suspected infection.

METHODS

We used registry data from two hospitals within The Ottawa Hospital network, between 2012 and 2016. Consecutive hematologic oncology inpatients who experienced activation of the RRS were included in the study. Data was gathered at the time of RRS activation and assessment. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Logistical regression was used to evaluate for predictors of in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

We included 401 patients during the study period. In-hospital mortality for all included patients was 41.9% (168 patients), and 145 patients (45%) were admitted to ICU following RRS activation. Among patients with suspected infection at the time of RRS activation, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria had a sensitivity of 86.9% (95% CI 80.9-91.6) and a specificity of 38.2% (95% CI 31.9-44.8) for predicting in-hospital mortality, while Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria had a sensitivity of 61.9% (95% CI 54.1-69.3) and a specificity of 91.4% (95% CI 87.1-94.7). Factors associated with increased in-hospital mortality included transfer to ICU after RRS activation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.56, 95% CI 2.12-5.97) and a higher number of RRS activations (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.63-3.69). Factors associated with improved survival included active malignancy treatment at the time of RRS activation (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.86) and longer hospital length of stay (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Hematologic oncology inpatients requiring RRS activation have high rates of subsequent ICU admission and mortality. ICU admission and higher number of RRS activations are associated with increased risk of death, while active cancer treatment and longer hospital stay are associated with lower risk of mortality. Clinicians should consider these factors in risk-stratifying these patients during RRS assessment.