METHOD: A cross-sectional study was performed in March and April 2016. The outdoor temperatures were measured using the wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) tool. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire containing sociodemographic factors prior to work shift; while working profile, hydration practices, and HRI symptoms at the end of work shift. The hydration status of the respondents was assessed by direct observation of their urine colour. Multiple logistic regression was performed to ascertain the effects of age, working profile, hydration practice, history of previous HRI, and hydration status on the likelihood that outdoor workers having moderate to severe HRI.
RESULTS: A total of 320 respondents completed the questionnaire. The mean (standard deviation) outdoor workplace temperature was 30.5°C (SD 0.53°C). The percentage of respondents who experienced moderate to severe HRI was 44.1%. The likelihood that outdoor workers experienced moderate to severe HRI symptoms was associated with irregular fluid intake [odds ratio (OR): 16.11, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 4.11; 63.20]; consumption of non-plain water (OR: 5.92, 95%CI: 2.79; 12.56); dehydration (OR: 3.32, 95%CI: 1.92; 5.74); and increasing outdoor workplace temperature (OR: 1.85, 95%CI: 1.09; 3.11).
CONCLUSION: Irregular drinking pattern and non-plain fluid intake was found to have a large effect on HRI severity among outdoor workers exposed high temperatures during a heat wave phenomenon.
METHOD: A total of 328 municipal workers were enrolled in April to March 2016 were asked to recall if they experienced eleven HRI symptoms during the previous work day. Rasch Measurement Model was used to examine the unidimensional parameters and bias for gender before identifying the threshold of HRI symptoms. We determined the threshold symptom based on the person-item map distribution on a logit ruler value.
RESULTS: A total of 320 respondents were analysed. The psychometric features HRI symptoms suggested evidence of unidimensionality and free of bias for gender (DIF size =0.57; DIF t value =1.03). Based on the person-item map distribution, the thirst item was determined as the threshold item (Cut-off point = -2.17 logit) for the preventative action purposes to group the person as mild and moderate/severe HRI groups.
CONCLUSION: Thirst item is viewed as threshold symptoms between mild and moderate or severe HRI symptoms. It is a reliable symptom to initiate behavioural response to quench the thirst by adequate fluids. Failure to recognise the thirst symptom may lead to devastating unwanted health complications.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using the stratified random sampling method was conducted among clinical year medical students in four public universities in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Data on the level of awareness of HTA and its associated factors were collected using a self-administered online questionnaire. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 27 to determine the level of awareness of HTA and its predictors.
RESULTS: Majority (69 percent) of participants had a low level of awareness of HTA. The predictors of high-level awareness of HTA were attitude toward HTA (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 7.417, 95 percent confidence interval (CI): 3.491, 15.758), peer interaction on HTA (AOR = 0.320, 95 percent CI: 0.115, 0.888), and previous training on HTA (AOR = 4.849, 95 percent CI: 1.096, 21.444).
CONCLUSIONS: Most future doctors in public universities exhibit a low awareness of HTA. This study highlights the interplay between attitudes toward HTA, peer interaction, and previous training as influential predictors of HTA awareness. An integrated and comprehensive educational approach is recommended to cultivate a positive attitude and harness the positive aspects of peer interaction while mitigating the potential negative impact of misconceptions. Emphasizing early exposure to HTA concepts through structured programs is crucial for empowering the upcoming generation of healthcare professionals, enabling them to navigate HTA complexities and contribute to evidence-based healthcare practices in Malaysia and beyond.
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review to understand the rapid response team's (RRT) effect on patient outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and two trial registers. The studies published up to May 6, 2022, from the inception date of the databases were included. Two researchers filtered the title, abstract and full text. The Version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool were used separately for randomized and non-randomized controlled trials for quality appraisal.
RESULTS: Sixty-one eligible studies were identified, four randomized controlled trials(RCTs), four non-randomized controlled trials, six interrupted time-series(ITS) design , and 47 pretest-posttest studies. A total of 52 studies reported hospital mortality, 51 studies reported cardiopulmonary arrests, 18 studies reported unplanned ICU admissions and ten studies reported LOS.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review found the variation in context and the type of RRT interventions restricts direct comparisons. The evidence for improving several aspects of patient outcomes was inconsistent, with most studies demonstrating that RRT positively impacts patient outcomes.
DESIGN: A retrospective single-centre study.
METHODS: Data on rapid response team activations from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2022 were retrieved from electronic medical records at a tertiary hospital in Hangzhou, China. All patients who met the eligibility criteria were included. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was conducted to analyse the data.
RESULTS: Out of 636 patients included, 18.4% (117) experienced a delay, with a median (interquartile range) of 8.5 (12) days from admission to rapid response team activation. Six significant prognostic factors were found to be associated with the higher hazard ratio of rapid response team delay, including call time (05:01 PM and 7:59 AM), emergency admission, a higher Modified Early Warning Score, an admission diagnosis of infection, a comorbidity of respiratory failure/Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and the absence of lung infection.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of rapid response team delays was lower, and the days from admission to rapid response team delay was longer than in previous studies. Healthcare providers are suggested to prioritise the care of high-risk patient groups and provide proactive monitoring to ensure timely identification and management.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: Implementing artificial intelligence in continuous monitoring systems for high-risk patients is recommended. The findings help nurses anticipate potential delays in rapid response team activation, enabling better preparedness.
IMPACT: The study highlights the prevalence of rapid response team delays, timing from admission to rapid response team activation and six prognostic factors influencing delays. It could shape patient care and inform future research. Hospital administrators should review staffing, especially during night shifts, to minimise delays. Further qualitative research is needed to explore why nurses may delay rapid response team activation.
REPORTING METHOD: The STROBE checklist was adhered to when reporting this study. 'No patient or public contribution'.