Clinical Sign-Based Rapid Response Team Call Criteria for Identifying Patients Requiring Intensive Care Management in Japan

Background and Objectives: For effective function of the rapid response system (RRS), prompt identification of patients at a high risk of cardiac arrest and RRS activation without hesitation are important. This study aimed to identify clinical factors that increase the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and cardiac arrest to identify patients who are likely to develop serious conditions requiring ICU management and appropriate RRS activation in Japan. Materials and Methods: We performed a single-center, case control study among patients requiring a rapid response team (RRT) call from 2017 to 2020. We extracted the demographic data, vital parameters, blood oxygen saturation (SpO(2)) and the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO(2)) from the medical records at the time of RRT call. The patients were divided into two groups to identify clinical signs that correlated with the progression of clinical deterioration. Patient characteristics in the two groups were compared using statistical tests based on the distribution. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to identify the appropriate cut-off values of vital parameters or FiO(2) that showed a significant difference between-group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify patient factors that were predictive of RRS necessity. Results: We analyzed the data of 65 patients who met our hospital’s RRT call criteria. Among the clinical signs in RRT call criteria, respiratory rate (RR) (p < 0.01) and the needed FiO(2) were significantly increased (p < 0.01) in patients with severe disease course. ROC curve analysis revealed RR and needed FiO(2) cut-off values of 25.5 breaths/min and 30%. The odds ratio for the progression of clinical deterioration was 40.5 times higher with the combination of RR ≥ 26 breaths/min and needed FiO(2) ≥ 30%. Conclusions: The combined use of RR ≥ 26 breaths/min and needed FiO(2) ≥ 30% might be valid for identifying patients requiring intensive care management.