Ru Ying Fong1, Wee Sern Sim Glen2, Ahmad Khairil Mohamed Jamil2, Wilson Wai San Tam3, Yanika Kowitlawakul3. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Sengkang General Hospital, Sengkang Health, Singapore. Electronic address: fong.ru.ying@skh.com.sg. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Sengkang General Hospital, Sengkang Health, Singapore. 3. Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the reliability, validity and resource utilization of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) and Patient Acuity Category Scale (PACS) triage scales. METHODS: A descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional design was used. Twenty-seven triage nurses were recruited to test interrater reliability for 20 patient case scenarios. Subsequently, interrater reliability was tested on 300 actual patients. Construct validity was analyzed using patients' hospital dispositions and resources utilized. RESULTS: For patient case scenarios, interrater reliability for both were very good, at 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86-0.88) for ESI and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.87-0.89) for PACS. For actual patients, interrater reliability for both were moderate, at 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50-0.68) for ESI and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.40-0.60) for PACS. Both ESI and PACS demonstrated construct validity with moderate correlations for hospital admissions and the number of resources used. PACS was unable to discriminate between patients that required more or less resources, whereas the ESI can. Patients that required two or more resources had higher rates of admission. CONCLUSIONS: Both triage systems demonstrated moderate interrater reliability and construct validity in triaging actual patients. The ESI has better resource discrimination ability than the PACS and can improve resource management in the ED.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the reliability, validity and resource utilization of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) and Patient Acuity Category Scale (PACS) triage scales. METHODS: A descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional design was used. Twenty-seven triage nurses were recruited to test interrater reliability for 20 patient case scenarios. Subsequently, interrater reliability was tested on 300 actual patients. Construct validity was analyzed using patients' hospital dispositions and resources utilized. RESULTS: For patient case scenarios, interrater reliability for both were very good, at 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86-0.88) for ESI and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.87-0.89) for PACS. For actual patients, interrater reliability for both were moderate, at 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50-0.68) for ESI and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.40-0.60) for PACS. Both ESI and PACS demonstrated construct validity with moderate correlations for hospital admissions and the number of resources used. PACS was unable to discriminate between patients that required more or less resources, whereas the ESI can. Patients that required two or more resources had higher rates of admission. CONCLUSIONS: Both triage systems demonstrated moderate interrater reliability and construct validity in triaging actual patients. The ESI has better resource discrimination ability than the PACS and can improve resource management in the ED.
Authors: Feng Xie; Marcus Eng Hock Ong; Johannes Nathaniel Min Hui Liew; Kenneth Boon Kiat Tan; Andrew Fu Wah Ho; Gayathri Devi Nadarajan; Lian Leng Low; Yu Heng Kwan; Benjamin Alan Goldstein; David Bruce Matchar; Bibhas Chakraborty; Nan Liu Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-08-02
Authors: Robert Hollinshead Long; Tyrous David Ward; Michael Edward Pruett; John Finklea Coleman; Marc Charles Plaisance Journal: Spec Care Dentist Date: 2020-05-24
Authors: Stefanie Völk; Uwe Koedel; Sophia Horster; Andreas Bayer; Jan G D'Haese; Hans-Walter Pfister; Matthias Klein Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Nan Liu; Feng Xie; Fahad Javaid Siddiqui; Andrew Fu Wah Ho; Bibhas Chakraborty; Gayathri Devi Nadarajan; Kenneth Boon Kiat Tan; Marcus Eng Hock Ong Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-03-25