Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan 19;12:1178224218823509. doi: 10.1177/1178224218823509

Table 2.

Care and treatment planning characteristics.

Study first author Total patient numbers Total RRT reviews NFR/LOMT before RRT review NFR/LOMT during or after RRT review Escalation to higher level care, e.g. ICU In-hospital mortality Formal advance care planning Discussion with patient, family or proxy decision maker Palliative care consultation
Austin24 Ca centre: 135
Gen med: 422
Total: 557		 NS 9.6%* 1.5% D*
13.3% A* 		34.8% 21.5% NS NS 1.5% B*
4.4% A*
Boniatti25 901 1051 5.1% 3.3% A 55.4% 46.9% at 30 days NS NS NS
Calzavacca26 1664 2237 22.7% 8.5% A 16% 34.3% NS NS NS
Calzavacca27 200 200 15% 9.5% 17.5% 27% NS NS NS
Calzavacca28 228 251 14.5% 9.2% 16.7% 40% NS NS NS
Cardona-Morrell29 2353 328# 12.5% 32.5% D NS 7.8% of patients aged 60+ 5% NS NS
Casamento30 NS 195 20% 15% 28% 34% NS NS NS
Chen20 NS 4161^ 45.4% 3.85% 19.1% 47.2% NS NS NS
Dargin31 998 1156 8.65% 5% D 39.7% 17% NS 44%@ 2.68%
Downar32 NS 291 8.9% NS 33% 24.7% NS 16.5% within 48 h 0% B
13% within 48 h^^
17% after 48 h^^
Gouda and Alqahtani33 NS 5904 6.66% D
1.27% A		 34.5% NS NS NS NS
Jäderling34 1818 2189 4.7% 16.3% D
14.4% A		 31.5% 25.6% NS NS NS
Jäderling35 NS 3063 34.2% Sweden
30.8% Australia		 14.4% Sweden
12.6% Australia		 18.7% Sweden
9.9% Australia		 27.7% Sweden
29.4% Australia		 NS NS NS
Jones11 518 652 20.3% 10.8% NS NS NS NS
Medical Emergency Team End-of-Life Care investigators14 518 652 Early/late reviews
16.9%/26.3%		 Early/late reviews
25.4%/35.9%		 NS Early/late review
12.8%/32.3%		 NS NS NS
Knott17 71 NS 32% 62% NS 42% NS NS NS
O’Horo36 NS Retrospective 4408
Prospective 135		 Retrospective/prospective study
13.5%/16.3%		 Retrospective/prospective study
7.2% D /5.9% D		 Retrospective study: 58.6%
Prospective study: 62.2%		 NS NS NS NS
Parr37 559 713 0% 4.8% A 45% 6.9% D NS NS NS
Psirides38 313 351 NS 31.3% (22.5% NFR, 8.8% other LOMT) 13.1% 2.8% at time of RRT
19.8% at 30 days		 NS NS NS
Schneider39 458 557 19.7% 7% D 11.4% 20.1% NS NS NS
Silva40 389 389 7.7% B 24.1% D 39.3% 18.7% D
52.8% overall		 NS NS NS
Smith41 1117 NS 11.01% B 5.55% D 17.91% 18.8%: deterioration group
62.64%: cardiac arrest group		 NS NS NS
Smith42 2843 3860 15.2% 5.7% D 15.5% 12.8% early RRT review
16.7% intermediate RRT review
30.6% for late RRT review
59.4% for patients who had cardiac arrest		 NS NS NS
Smith13 NS 390 11.5% 16.4% A 54% NS NS NS NS
Stelfox21 5103 NS 3.8% 4910/5103 8.05% D 24.83% 32.6% NS NS NS
Sulistio19 351 456 17.9% NFR
1.42% LOMT		 21.7% 24.5% NS NS 15.1%
Sundararajan43 NS 994 Group 1
LOMT not associated with RRT team review 100%		 Group 2: Limitations of Medical Treatment at time of RRT review 5% NS NS NS Group 1
50% with patient
90% with next of kin
Group 2:
18% with patient
58% with next of kin		 NS
Tam44 5320 NS 58% 17% D 8.4% of ‘end-of-life’ group
17% of ‘non-end-of-life’ group		 25% of ‘end-of-life’ group
8% of ‘non-end-of-life’ group		 NS NS 34% of ‘end-of-life’ group
5.3% of ‘non-end-of-life’ group
Tirkkonen45 640 774 0% 9.22% 26% (no LOMT)
3.4% (LOMT)		 14% (no LOMT)
44% (LOMT)		 NS 76% for new LOMT (7% of total patients) NS
Tirkkonen46 458 569 6.3% 7.4% D 27.2% 26% NS NS NS
Visser47 132 141 79.4% 24.2% D 10.6% 28% NS NS NS
White48 800 1151 22.2% 2% D
5% A		 17.2% 12.6% NS NS NS

A, after; B, before; D, During; ICU, intensive care unit; LOMT, limitations of medical treatment; NFR, not for resuscitation; NS, not stated; RRT, Rapid Response Team.

*

Cancer centre patients.

#

Included 184 cases where patient died following RRT review; 144 controls who lived.

^

Hospitals with an RRT (control hospitals without RRT were excluded).

@

Resuscitation status at admission.

^^

Subset of patients who had a change in NFR status following the RRT review.