It appears that most of the studies included comparisons between dedicated unit to stroke (without cardiovascular monitoring) compared to ward care in departments of general medicine or general medicine with rehabilitation.
Using a trigger threshold of ≥ 3, we calculated an increment of nearly 40% of alerts in comparison to current ward care.
Adopting an RRS is a complex process that needs time to become established as an integral part of the ward care system [14, 27 29].
In comparison to current clinical ward care, the EWS would have significantly increased the detection of critical ill patients by ward staff by 40%.
Our data suggests that the EWS would allow early recognition for a higher number of patients in comparison to current ward care.
Our study's main goals were (1) to assess the EWS in specific time windows preceding the acute event, (2) to study its temporal behavior and its relation with outcomes, and (3) ultimately to compare it with the established ward care.
Whatever the trigger cutoff and physiological variables, the increase in medical workload must be accepted [[40]] since the EWS improves care quality in comparison to current ward care and clinical judgment.
Secondary outcomes include indicators for quality of hospital ward care, patients experiences with medical ward care, patients health-related quality of life, and healthcare providers' experiences.
Level 0: Patients whose needs can be met through normal ward care in an acute hospital.
Could COWS forecast the need for 'step-up' from normal ward care?
Of 79 patients studied, 17 required 'step-up' from normal ward care (Table 1).
