You are here

Responses

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original article
Modelling the allocation of paediatric intensive care retrieval teams in England and Wales
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 20 September 2019
    Additional considerations for future modelling of paediatric intensive care retrieval teams in England and Wales
    • Benedict T Griffiths, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant South Thames Retrieval Service
    • Other Contributors:
      • Andrew G Nyman, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant
      • Jonathan Lillie, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant
      • Alison Pienaar, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant
      • Miriam Fine-Goulden, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant
      • Marilyn McDougall, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant
      • Shelley Riphagen, Paediatric Intensive Care Consultant

    We commend the DEPICT group for gathering evidence to support or refute the current set of performance standards for specialist paediatric intensive care retrieval teams (PICRTs), for which there is currently limited evidence base.

    A key tenet of ‘the paper’ was geographical distance as the sole reason for a breach in the 180 minute to bedside standard.[1] In our experience, the commonest reason to breach was ‘team availability’. In 2018 South Thames Retrieval Service (STRS) performed 824 emergency retrievals. In 4% of these, the team did not reach the bedside within 180 minutes. On 33/36 occasions, the reason for delay was lack of availability of retrieval team due to concurrent deployment.

    STRS is commissioned to staff two teams on every shift. In 2018 32% of retrievals were performed concurrently. STRS is the second busiest PICRT in the UK, however on 29 % of shifts, no retrieval team was launched. STRS is a fully integrated retrieval service –all staff are based in the intensive care unit, and when not on retrieval work clinically in the PICU. This allows flexible staffing and in times of high demand, helps support increased PICU bed capacity. In 2018, 98.8% of patients were kept within region.

    The authors highlight the importance of mobilisation time. Despite the integration of our service within a busy PICU, STRS recorded the highest national compliance with the mobilisation standard for 2017.[2]

    In our region 90% of intubations are p...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    Ben Griffiths is site PI for the DEPICT study at Evelina London