Síguenos en Twitter     Síguenos en Facebook     Síguenos en Google+     Síguenos en YouTube     Siguenos en Linkedin     Correo Grupsagessa     Gmail     Yahoo Mail     Dropbox     Instagram     Pinterest     Slack     Google Drive     Reddit     StumbleUpon     Print

SOBRE EL AUTOR **

Mi foto
FACP. Colegio de médicos de Tarragona Nº 4305520 / fgcapriles@gmail.com

WORLD EMERGENCY MEDICINE SOCIETIES

iSepsis – Understanding Lactate

Buscar en contenido

Contenido:

domingo, 1 de mayo de 2016

Formal vs quick-look triage

Resultado de imagen de European Journal of Emergency MEdicine
Betz, Martin; Stempien, James; Wilde, Alan; Bryce, Rhond. European Journal of Emergency Medicine: June 2016 - Volume 23 - Issue 3 - p 185–189
doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000239
"Background: Emergency Department (ED) triage systems have become increasingly comprehensive over time, requiring ever more resources such as nursing time and computer support. There are very few studies that have looked at whether this increased complexity results in improved performance.
Objectives: This study looked at one aspect of performance, comparing reliability of triage nurses’ (TNs) triage scores utilizing a simple quick-look method with a commonly used, resource-intense, five-level triage system.
Methods: This observational study of TNs was carried out in two urban tertiary-care hospital EDs, in real time, assessing patients arriving consecutively. Immediately upon patients’ arrival, TNs were asked to assign triage scores based simply on their observation of the patient and the chief complaint. The patient was then triaged in the department’s usual way, utilizing a computer-assisted five-level triage system [Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS)]. Agreement between scores was quantified. κ scores were calculated, and weighted by the CTAS score.
Results: A total of 496 triage assessments were included. Percent agreement between the quick-look method and the standard CTAS method was 84.5%. κ scores were moderately high. Fourteen patients (2.6%), ultimately classified as CTAS 1 or 2, initially received lower scores from TNs using the quick-look method. No comparison of validity was assessed.
Conclusion: TNs assigning triage scores to ED patients on arrival, using only chief complaint and observation, were statistically comparable to scores assigned utilizing a resource-intense, comprehensive triage system, but clinically significant discrepancies were identified."