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:...
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to provide a population-based snapshot of ED visits by patients with cancer in North Carolina. Efforts that target clinical problems and specific populations may improve delivery of quality cancer care and avoid ED visits.
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 ...
BackgroundIntensive Care Units (ICUs) in the United States admit more than 5.7 million people each year. The ICU level of care helps people with life-threatening illness or injuries and involves close, constant attention by a team of specially-trained health care providers. Delay between condition onset and implementation of necessary interventions can dramatically impact the prognosis of patients with life-threatening diagnoses. Evidence supports a connection between information overload and medical errors. A tool that improves display and retrieval of key clinical information has great potential to benefit patient outcomes. The purpose of this review is to synthesize research on the use of visualization dashboards in health care.ObjectiveThe purpose of conducting this literature review is to synthesize previous research on the use of dashboards visualizing electronic health record information for health care providers. A review of the existing literature on this subject can be used to identify gaps in prior research and to inform further research efforts on this topic. Ultimately, this evidence can be used to guide the development, testing, and implementation of a new solution to optimize the visualization of clinical information, reduce clinician cognitive overload, and improve patient outcomes.MethodsArticles were included if they addressed the development, testing, implementation, or use of a visualization dashboard solution in a health care setting. An initial search was conducted of literature on dashboards only in the intensive care unit setting, but there were not many articles found that met the inclusion criteria. A secondary follow-up search was conducted to broaden the results to any health care setting. The initial and follow-up searches returned a total of 17 articles that were analyzed for this literature review.ResultsVisualization dashboard solutions decrease time spent on data gathering, difficulty of data gathering process, cognitive load, time to task completion, errors, and improve situation awareness, compliance with evidence-based safety guidelines, usability, and navigation.ConclusionsResearchers can build on the findings, strengths, and limitations of the work identified in this literature review to bolster development, testing, and implementation of novel visualization dashboard solutions. Due to the relatively few studies conducted in this area, there is plenty of room for researchers to test their solutions and add significantly to the field of knowledge on this subject.
School nurses intervene with students, parents, and school staff to advance the health and academic success of students. We conducted an integrative literature review of published research to describe the types of school nurse interventions and health and education outcome measures and to examine how school nurse interventions were linked to student outcomes. Sixty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. We used the National Association of School Nurses' Framework for 21st Century School Nursing Practice to categorize school nurse interventions and health and education outcome measures. The majority of interventions were categorized under the care coordination principle, most commonly, motivational interviewing and counseling. In 17 studies, school nurse interventions were linked to improved student outcomes. Most studies (80%) were descriptive. To advance school nursing science, researchers can build on this foundation with more rigorous research methods to evaluate the impact of school nurse interventions and activities on student health and education outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.