↓ Skip to main content

Crisis checklists for in-hospital emergencies: expert consensus, simulation testing and recommendations for a template determined by a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary learning collaborative

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Crisis checklists for in-hospital emergencies: expert consensus, simulation testing and recommendations for a template determined by a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary learning collaborative
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2288-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian P. Subbe, John Kellett, Paul Barach, Catriona Chaloner, Hayley Cleaver, Tim Cooksley, Erik Korsten, Eilish Croke, Elinor Davis, Ashley JR De Bie, Lesley Durham, Chris Hancock, Jilian Hartin, Tracy Savijn, John Welch

Abstract

'Failure to rescue' of hospitalized patients with deteriorating physiology on general wards is caused by a complex array of organisational, technical and cultural failures including a lack of standardized team and individual expected responses and actions. The aim of this study using a learning collaborative method was to develop consensus recomendations on the utility and effectiveness of checklists as training and operational tools to assist in improving the skills of general ward staff on the effective rescue of patients with abnormal physiology. A scoping study of the literature was followed by a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary international learning collaborative. We sought to achieve a consensus on procedures and clinical simulation technology to determine the requirements, develop and test a safe using a checklist template that is rapidly accessible to assist in emergency management of common events for general ward use. Safety considerations about deteriorating patients were agreed upon and summarized. A consensus was achieved among an international group of experts on currently available checklist formats performing poorly in simulation testing as first responders in general ward clinical crises. The Crisis Checklist Collaborative ratified a consensus template for a general ward checklist that provides a list of issues for first responders to address (i.e. 'Check In'), a list of prompts regarding common omissions (i.e. 'Stop & Think'), and, a list of items required for the safe "handover" of patients that remain on the general ward (i.e. 'Check Out'). Simulation usability assessment of the template demonstrated feasibility for clinical management of deteriorating patients. Emergency checklists custom-designed for general ward patients have the potential to guide the treatment speed and reliability of responses for emergency management of patients with abnormal physiology while minimizing the risk of adverse events. Interventional trials are needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 13 26%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Other 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 13 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 38%
Unspecified 16 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Psychology 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 4 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2017.
All research outputs
#1,340,874
of 12,354,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#611
of 4,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,113
of 268,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#23
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,354,690 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,050 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,267 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.