Literature DB >> 10730830

Reliability and validity of a new five-level triage instrument.

R C Wuerz1, L W Milne, D R Eitel, D Travers, N Gilboy.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Triage is the initial clinical sorting process in hospital emergency departments (EDs). Because of poor reproducibility and validity of three-level triage, the authors developed and validated a new five-level triage instrument, the Emergency Severity Index (ESI). The study objectives were: 1) to validate the triage instrument against ED patients' clinical resource and hospitalization needs, and 2) to measure the interrater reliability (reproducibility) of the instrument.
METHODS: This was a prospective, observational cohort study of a population-based convenience sample of adult patients triaged during 100 hours at two urban referral hospitals. Validation by resource use and hospitalization (criterion standards) and reproducibility by blinded paired triage assignments compared with weighted kappa analysis were assessed.
RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-eight patients were enrolled; 45 were excluded due to incomplete evaluations. The resulting cohort of 493 patients was 52% female, was 26% nonwhite, and had a median age of 40 years (range 16-95); overall, 159 (32%) patients were hospitalized. Weighted kappa for triage assignment was 0.80 (95% CI = 0.76 to 0.84). Resource use and hospitalization rates were strongly associated with triage level. For patients in category 5, only one-fourth (17/67) required any diagnostic test or procedure, and none were hospitalized (upper confidence limit, 5%). Conversely, in category 1, one of twelve patients was discharged (upper confidence limit, 25%), and none required fewer than two resources.
CONCLUSIONS: This five-level triage instrument was shown to be both valid and reliable in the authors' practice settings. It reproducibly triages patients into five distinct strata, from very high hospitalization/resource intensity to very low hospitalization/resource intensity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10730830     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb01066.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  117 in total

Review 1.  [Triage systems in the emergency department].

Authors:  P Weyrich; M Christ; N Celebi; R Riessen
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 0.840

2.  Kappa statistic.

Authors:  Christopher R Carpenter
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-07-05       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Measuring and forecasting emergency department crowding in real time.

Authors:  Nathan R Hoot; Chuan Zhou; Ian Jones; Dominik Aronsky
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2007-03-27       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Forecasting emergency department crowding: a prospective, real-time evaluation.

Authors:  Nathan R Hoot; Larry J Leblanc; Ian Jones; Scott R Levin; Chuan Zhou; Cynthia S Gadd; Dominik Aronsky
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Forecasting emergency department crowding: a discrete event simulation.

Authors:  Nathan R Hoot; Larry J LeBlanc; Ian Jones; Scott R Levin; Chuan Zhou; Cynthia S Gadd; Dominik Aronsky
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 5.721

6.  Improving Five-level Triage Form According to the Experts Viewpoint; A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Ali Bazm; Elahe Khorasani; Manal Etemadi; Hadi Nadeali
Journal:  Bull Emerg Trauma       Date:  2015-01

7.  Dynamic patient grouping and prioritization: a new approach to emergency department flow improvement.

Authors:  Omar M Ashour; Gül E Okudan Kremer
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2014-12-09

8.  Percentage of US emergency department patients seen within the recommended triage time: 1997 to 2006.

Authors:  Leora I Horwitz; Elizabeth H Bradley
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-09

9.  Revising expectations from rapid HIV tests in the emergency department.

Authors:  Rochelle P Walensky; Christian Arbelaez; William M Reichmann; Ron M Walls; Jeffrey N Katz; Brian L Block; Matthew Dooley; Adam Hetland; Simeon Kimmel; Jessica D Solomon; Elena Losina
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Does modality of survey administration impact data quality: audio computer assisted self interview (ACASI) versus self-administered pen and paper?

Authors:  William M Reichmann; Elena Losina; George R Seage; Christian Arbelaez; Steven A Safren; Jeffrey N Katz; Adam Hetland; Rochelle P Walensky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.