Literature DB >> 10505909

Consistency of retrospective triage decisions as a standardised instrument for audit.

S W Goodacre1, M Gillett, R D Harris, K P Houlihan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the level of agreement between senior medical staff when asked to perform retrospective case note review of nursing triage decisions, both before and after development of a consensus approach.
METHODS: Four medical reviewers independently allocated triage categories to 50 emergency department patients after review of their case notes. They were blind to the identity of the triage nurse and their triage categorisation. The process was repeated twice, firstly after agreement on a consensus approach and then using formal guidelines.
RESULTS: Agreement between reviewers was initially fair to moderate (kappa = 0.27 to 0.53). This failed to improve after development of a consensus approach (kappa = 0.29 to 0.57). There was a trend towards better agreement when guidelines were used but agreement was still only moderate (kappa = 0.31 to 0.63).
CONCLUSIONS: Audit of nurse triage categorisation by senior medical staff performing case note review has only fair to moderate consistency between reviewers. Use of this technique will result in frustration among those whose performance is being audited if they recognise inconsistency in the standard they are compared against.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10505909      PMCID: PMC1347048          DOI: 10.1136/emj.16.5.322

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med        ISSN: 1351-0622


  6 in total

1.  Piloting an evaluation of triage.

Authors:  S Read; S George; L Westlake; B Williams; J Glasgow; T Potter
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 5.837

2.  The nursing triage process: a video review and a proposed audit tool.

Authors:  J C Williams; N L Jones; F J Richardson; C Jones; P W Richmond
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1996-11

Review 3.  What is an emergency? The judgments of two physicians.

Authors:  S S Foldes; L R Fischer; K Kaminsky
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Triage: limitations in predicting need for emergent care and hospital admission.

Authors:  J C Brillman; D Doezema; D Tandberg; D P Sklar; K D Davis; S Simms; B J Skipper
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 5.721

5.  Does a physician visual assessment change triage?

Authors:  J C Brillman; D Doezema; D Tandberg; D P Sklar; B J Skipper
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 2.469

6.  Differences in priorities assigned to patients by triage nurses and by consultant physicians in accident and emergency departments.

Authors:  S George; S Read; L Westlake; A Fraser-Moodie; P Pritty; B Williams
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 3.710

  6 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  Modern triage in the emergency department.

Authors:  Michael Christ; Florian Grossmann; Daniela Winter; Roland Bingisser; Elke Platz
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  [Interdisciplinary emergency departments : first experiences from the ENT and head and neck perspective].

Authors:  T van Bremen; A Glien; I Gräff; A Gerstner; A Schröck
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  [Manchester triage system. Process optimization in the interdisciplinary emergency department].

Authors:  O Schellein; F Ludwig-Pistor; D H Bremerich
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Electronic and manual registration of Manchester System: reliability, accuracy, and time evaluation.

Authors:  Emilia Aparecida Cicolo; Heloísa Helena Ciqueto Peres
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2019-12-05
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.