Perioperative medicine & outcomes
An economic evaluation of the Prioritising Responses Of Nurses To deteriorating patient Observations (PRONTO) clinical trial
Authors' conclusion
The results of the economic analysis demonstrated that the PRONTO intervention improved nurses' responses to patients with abnormal vital signs and significantly reduced hospital LOS by two days at 12 months in the intervention group compared to baseline.
Study context
- Population
- Hospital admissions at 4 hospitals, pre-intervention (T0), 6 months (T1) and 12 months (T2) post-intervention
- Participants
- 6,065 admissions · 4 hospitals
- Comparison
- PRONTO intervention vs control
- Interventionn = 3,102
- Controln = 2,963reference
- Primary endpoint
- Hospital costs and patient length of stay (LOS)
- Follow-up
- 6 months (T1) and 12 months (T2) post-intervention vs pre-intervention (T0)
Methodological detailshospital perspective, 4 hospitals, generalised estimating equations
- Hospital perspective
- 4 hospitals
- Generalised estimating equations
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Hospital costs and LOS, intervention vs control, change from T0
Intervention vs ControlLOS difference, days (95% CI)
T0 - T1
−1.10(−2.44 to 0.24)
T0 & T2
−2.18(−3.53 to −0.82)
- T0 - T1
- cost difference −364 A$ (95% CI −3,782 to 3049)
- T0 - T2
- cost difference −1,710 A$ (95% CI −5,162 to 1,742)
- Intervention cost per admitted patient (incl. nurse training and labour)
- 69.61 A$
Original publication
An economic evaluation of the Prioritising Responses Of Nurses To deteriorating patient Observations (PRONTO) clinical trial. Resuscitation. Published 10 June 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →