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. Keywords: triage; emergency service, hospital; clinical protocols; nursing assessment. ACADEMIC EMER-GENCY MEDICINE 2000; 7:236-242 T HERE were 95 million hospital emergency department (ED) visits in 1997.1 For more than 30 years, literature reports indicate that as many as one-half of ED visits are for minor health problems. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Triage is the preliminary clinical assessment process that sorts patients prior to full ED diagnosis and treatment, so that in the setting of resource constraints (i.e., limited beds, staff, and equipment), patients with the highest acuity are treated first. Most U.S. hospitals use three triage categories, 9 whereas five-level triage prevails in Canada, 10 and health insurers use triage data when reviewing the ''medical necessity'' of ED services for reimbursement purposes.14 Such decision making depends on reproducible and valid triage classifications. Unfortunately, existing ED triage methods are flawed, particularly for identification of nonurgent patients who may be referred for care elsewhere. 14-21Because of limitations in existing triage processes, we developed and validated a five-level triage instrument, based on an expanded conceptual model:...

Abstract. Objectives: To implement a new fivelevel emergency department (ED) triage algorithm, the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), into nursing practice, and validate the instrument with a population-based cohort using hospitalization and ED length of stay as outcome measures. Methods: The five-level ESI algorithm was introduced to triage nurses at two university hospital EDs, and implemented into practice with reinforcement and change management strategies. Interrater reliability was assessed by a posttest and by a series of independent paired patient triage assignments, and a staff survey was performed. A cohort validation study of all adult patients registered during a one-month period immediately following implementation was performed. Results: Eight thousand two hundred fifty-one ED patients were studied. Weighted kappa for reproducibility of triage assignments was 0.80 for the posttest (n = 62 nurses), and 0.73 for patient triages (n = 219). Hospitalization was 28% overall and was strongly associated with triage level, decreasing from 58/63 (92%) of patients in triage category 1, to 12/739 (2%) in triage category 5. Median lengths of stay were two hours shorter at either triage extreme (high and low acuity) than in intermediate categories. Outcomes followed a-priori predictions. Staff nurses rated the new program easier to use, and more useful as a triage instrument than previous three-level triage. They provided feedback, which resulted in significant revisions to the algorithm and educational materials. Conclusions: Triage nurses at these two hospitals successfully implemented the ESI algorithm and provided useful feedback for further refinement of the instrument. Emergency Severity Index triage reproducibly stratifies patients into five groups with distinct clinical outcomes. Key words: triage; emergency service; hospital; clinical protocols; nursing assessment. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2001; 8:170-176 N EARLY all hospital emergency departments (EDs) use some form of triage, a focused clinical assessment usually performed by a professional nurse. The triage nurse aims to rapidly prioritize patients so that those with the greatest need are seen before those with less urgent conditions. Triage is conventionally thought to be better than a ''first come, first served'' entry policy because effective treatment for many emergencies is time-critical, 1,2 yet on the other hand, a substantial proportion of patients 3-5 have more minor emergencies that do not necessitate immediate intervention.In the United States, most EDs use three-level or four-level comprehensive triage.6 These comprehensive triage models of practice have been criticized 7 because of poor reproducibility [8][9][10][11][12] in acuity assignments, and because of lack of empiric validation 13 against clinical outcomes. In a preliminary study, 14 a new triage instrument, the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), demonstrated highly reproducible, clinically valid five-level triage stratification. The primary purposes of the current study were to ...

No abstract

ESI v. 2 triage produced reliable, valid stratification of patients across seven sites. ESI triage should be evaluated as an ED casemix identification system for uniform data collection in the United States and compared with other major ED triage methods.

Introduction: The Emergency Severity Index (ESI©) is an initial measure of patient assessment in the emergency department (ED). It rates patients based on acuity and predicted resource intensity from Level 1 (most ill) to Level 5 (least resource intensive). Already implemented and evaluated in several US hospitals, ESI has yet to be evaluated in a Canadian setting or compared with the fivelevel Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). Objective: To compare the inter-observer reliability of 2 five-level triage and acuity scales. Methods: Ten triage nurses, who had all been trained in the use of CTAS, from 4 urban, academic Canadian EDs were randomly assigned either to training in ESI version 3 (ESI v.3) or to refresher training in CTAS. They independently assigned triage scores to 200 emergency cases, unaware of the rating by the other nurses. Results: Number of years of nursing practice was the only significant demographic difference found between the 2 groups (p = 0.014). A quadratically weighted kappa to measure the inter-observer reliability of the CTAS group was 0.91 (0.90, 0.99) and not significantly different from that of the ESI group 0.89 (0.88, 0.99). An inter-test generalizability (G) study performed on the variance components derived from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed G(5) = 0.90 (0.82, 0.99). Conclusions: After 3 hours of training, experienced triage nurses were able to perform triage assessments using ESI v.3 with the same inter-observer reliability as those with experience and refresher training in using the CTAS.