Objective: To examine whether current validation methods of emergency department triage scales actually assess the instrument's validity. Methods: Optimal methods of emergency department triage scale validation are examined in developed countries and their application to developing countries is considered. Results and conclusion: Numerous limitations are embedded in the process of validating triage scales. Methods of triage scale validation in developed countries may not be appropriate and repeatable in developing countries. Even in developed countries there are problems in conceptualising validation methods. A new consensus building validation approach has been constructed and recommended for a developing country setting. The Delphi method, a consensual validation process, is advanced as a more appropriate alternative for validating triage scales in developing countries.
Objective. To validate a revised version of the paediatric South African Triage Scale (SATS) against admission as a reference standard and compare the sensitivity of triage using: (i) clinical discriminators; (ii) an age-appropriate physiological composite score; and (iii) a combination of both. Methods. A prospective cohort study was undertaken validating the revised paediatric SATS against outcome markers of children at six emergency centres during a 2-month period in 2011. The primary outcome marker was the proportion of children admitted. Validity indicators including sensitivity (Se), specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) were used to estimate the validity. Associated percentages for over-/under-triage were used to further assess practical application of the paediatric SATS. Results. A total of 2 014 children were included. The percentage of hospital admissions increased with an increase in the level of urgency from 5% in the non-urgent patients to 73% in the emergency patients. The data demonstrated that sensitivity increased substantially when using the SATS, which is a combination of clinical discriminators and the Triage Early Warning Score (TEWS) (Se 91.0%, NPV 95.3%), compared with use of clinical discriminators in isolation (Se 57.1%, NPV 86.3%) or the TEWS in isolation (Se 75.6%, NPV 89.1%). Conclusion. The results of this study illustrate that the revised paediatric SATS is a safe and robust triage tool.
Background. Triage is one of the core requirements for the provision of effective emergency care and has been shown to reduce patient mortality. However, in low-and middle-income countries this strategy is underused, under-resourced and poorly researched. Objective. To assess the inter-and intra-rater reliability and accuracy of nurse triage ratings when using the South African Triage Scale (SATS) in an emergency department (ED) in Timergara, Pakistan. Methods. Fifteen ED nurses assigned triage ratings to a set of 42 reference vignettes (written case reports of ED patients) under classroom conditions. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by comparing these triage ratings; intra-rater reliability was assessed by asking the nurses to re-triage 10 random vignettes from the original set of 42 vignettes and comparing these duplicate ratings. Accuracy of the nurse ratings was measured against the reference standard. Results. Inter-rater reliability was substantial (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 -0.85). The intrarater agreement was also high with 87% exact agreement (95% CI 67 -100) and 100% agreement allowing for a one-level discrepancy in triage ratings. Overall, the SATS had high specificity (97%) and moderate sensitivity (70%). Across all acuity levels the proportion of overtriage did not exceed the acceptable threshold of 30 -50%. Under-triage was acceptable for all except emergency cases (66%). Conclusion. ED nurses in Pakistan can reliably use the SATS to assign triage acuity ratings. While the tool is accurate for 'very urgent' and 'routine' cases, importantly, it may under-triage 'emergency' cases requiring immediate attention. Approaches that will improve accuracy and validity are discussed.
ObjectiveTo assess the validity of the South African Triage Scale (SATS) in four Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)-supported emergency departments (ED, two trauma-only sites, one mixed site (both medical and trauma cases) and one paediatric-only site) in Afghanistan, Haiti and Sierra Leone.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study conducted between June 2013 and June 2014. Validity was assessed by comparing patients’ SATS ratings with their final ED outcome (ie, hospital admission, death or discharge).ResultsIn the two trauma settings, the SATS demonstrated good validity: it accurately predicted an increase in the likelihood of mortality and hospitalisation across incremental acuity levels (p<0.001) and ED outcomes for ‘green’ and ‘red’ patients matched the predicted ED outcomes in 84%–99% of cases. In the mixed ED, the SATS was able to predict an incremental increase in hospitalisation (p<0.001) across both trauma and non-trauma cases. In the paediatric-only settings, SATS was able to predict an incremental increase in hospitalisation in the non-trauma cases only (p<0.001). However, 87% (non-trauma) and 94% (trauma) of ‘red’ patients in the mixed-medical setting were overtriaged and 76% (non-trauma) and 100% (trauma) of ‘green’ patients in the paediatric settings were undertriaged.ConclusionThe SATS is a valid tool for trauma-only settings in low-resource countries. Its use in mixed settings seems justified, but context-specific assessments would seem prudent. Finally, in paediatric settings with endemic malaria, adding haemoglobin level to the SATS discriminator list may help to improve the undertriage of patients with malaria.
BackgroundDespite the high burden of pediatric mortality from preventable conditions in low and middle income countries and the existence of multiple tools to prioritize critically ill children in low-resource settings, no analysis exists of the reliability and validity of these tools in identifying critically ill children in these scenarios.MethodsThe authors performed a systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature published, for studies pertaining to for triage and IMCI in low and middle-income countries in English language, from January 01, 2000 to October 22, 2013. An updated literature search was performed on on July 1, 2015. The databases searched included the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed and Web of Science. Only studies that presented data on the reliability and validity evaluations of triage tool were included in this review. Two independent reviewers utilized a data abstraction tool to collect data on demographics, triage tool components and the reliability and validity data and summary findings for each triage tool assessed.ResultsOf the 4,717 studies searched, seven studies evaluating triage tools and 10 studies evaluating IMCI were included. There were wide varieties in method for assessing reliability and validity, with different settings, outcome metrics and statistical methods.ConclusionsStudies evaluating triage tools for pediatric patients in low and middle income countries are scarce. Furthermore the methodology utilized in the conduct of these studies varies greatly and does not allow for the comparison of tools across study sites.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12887-017-0796-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
IntroductionTriage protocols standardize and improve patient care in accident and emergency departments (A&Es). Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH), the largest public tertiary hospital in East Africa, is resource-limited and was without A&E-specific triage protocols.ObjectivesWe sought to standardize patient triage through implementation of the South African Triage Scale (SATS). We aimed to (1) assess the reliability of triage decisions among A&E healthcare workers following an educational intervention and (2) analyze the validity of the SATS in KNH’s A&E.MethodsPart 1 was a prospective, before and after trial utilizing an educational intervention and assessing triage reliability using previously validated vignettes administered to 166 healthcare workers. Part 2 was a triage chart review wherein we assessed the validity of the SATS in predicting patient disposition outcomes by inclusion of 2420 charts through retrospective, systematic sampling.ResultsHealthcare workers agreed with an expert defined triage standard for 64% of triage scenarios following an educational intervention, and had a 97% agreement allowing for a one-level discrepancy in the SATS score. There was “good” inter-rater agreement based on an intraclass correlation coefficient and quadratic weighted kappa. We analyzed 1209 pre-SATS and 1211 post-SATS patient charts and found a non-significant difference in undertriage and statistically significant decrease in overtriage rates between the pre- and post-SATS cohorts (undertriage 3.8 and 7.8%, respectively, p = 0.2; overtriage 70.9 and 62.3%, respectively, p < 0.05). The SATS had a sensitivity of 92.2% and specificity of 37.7% for predicting admission, death, or discharge in the A&E.ConclusionHealthcare worker triage decisions using the SATS were more consistent with expert opinion following an educational intervention. The SATS also performed well in predicting outcomes with high sensitivity and satisfactory levels of both undertriage and overtriage, confirming the SATS as a contextually appropriate triage system at a major East African A&E.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12245-019-0221-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.