A comparison of a formal triage scoring system and a quick-look triage approach

Betz, Martin; Stempien, James; Wilde, Alan; Bryce, Rhonda

doi:10.1097/mej.0000000000000239

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ten triage systems from 11 articles were finally included for analysis: Clinical GPS,55 Echelle Liégeoise d’Index de Sévérité à l’Admission,56 FRench Emergency Nurses Classification in Hospital scale,57 Hacettepe Emergency Triage System,58 Medical Emergency Triage and Treatment System,59 Netherlands Triage System,60 Pediatric Triage and Acuity Scale,61 Rapid Triage Score,62 Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-Hospital Unit West63 and Soterion Rapid Triage System 64 65. All these systems were examined in single-centre studies, and 4 out of 11 were prospectively conducted55 58 60 62 (table 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five-level emergency triage systems: variation in assessment of validity

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five-level emergency triage systems: variation in assessment of validity

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under such situations, the introduction of adequate triage nurses and a systematic triage system such as JTAS is expected to decrease the frequency of sudden turns for the worse in the emergency rooms. According to a report, the percentage agreement between the “quick‐look triage” (carried out using the chief complaint within 30 s) and the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale was 84.5%, and κ scores were moderately high 14. However, after introduction of JTAS, when compared to the previous simple triage system, the decrease in the frequency of sudden turn for the worse was unknown.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the frequency of over‐ and under‐triage has been discussed many times at afterward inspection,1, 14, 15, 18, 19 under‐triage is not always directly linked to problems in the emergency rooms. So, we suspected that paying attention to the frequency or time/location circumstances of a sudden turn for the worse in the emergency room would assist in adequately understanding the actual problems of under‐triage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of the effect of introduction of JTAS in the emergency room

Koyama

Kashima

Yamamoto

et al. 2017

Acute Medicine & Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimThe purpose of this study was to better understand the effects of introducing the Japan Triage and Acuity Scale (JTAS) in the emergency room for walk‐in patients.MethodsA simple triage was used in Term A (from April 2006 to December 2010, 4 years and 9 months) and the JTAS was introduced in Term B (from January 2011 to September 2015, 4 years and 9 months). The number of patients who had a sudden turn for the worse after arrival in the emergency room and the time between attendance and emergency catheterization (TBAEC) due to acute coronary syndrome were reviewed.ResultsThere were 653 patients in Term A and 626 patients in Term B who were finally diagnosed as having serious causes. There was no significant difference in the frequency of a sudden turn for the worse between the two terms. There were 182 patients in Term A and 167 patients in Term B who underwent emergency catheterization due to acute coronary syndrome. When ST elevation was recognized in the first electrocardiogram, the median time between attendance and medical attention during Term B improved significantly, by 4.5 min. However, there was no significant difference in medians for TBAEC. When ST elevation was not recognized, there was no significant difference between the two terms, neither in terms of median time between attendance and medical attention, nor TBAEC.ConclusionThe data suggests that the effects of introducing the JTAS in the emergency room were restrictive in these two aspects.

show abstract

“…At present, four major emergency triage scales are used to determine the priority of care for a patient: the Australasian Triage Scale (ATS), the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), the Manchester Triage System (MTS), and the Emergency Severity Index (ESI). Many scholars have studied these scales and have shown that their overall reliability is moderate [6–9]. However, differences have been revealed in the internal consistency of the system between nurses [7] and between nurses and doctors [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, few data are available that can be used to compare this standard with others. The earliest triage tool, the ATS, was developed in Australia and is widely used [6]. Although its use in China has not been reported, the ATS, like the CHT, was carried out by specifically trained and experienced registered nurses [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Four-Level and Three-District Triage Standard and the Australasian Triage Scale

Zhu

Zhang

et al. 2019

Emergency Medicine International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emergency triage is an important tool for prioritizing urgent or critical patients, and its effect needs to be investigated and evaluated. This observational study aimed to compare the reliability and validity of the Chinese four-level and three-district triage standard (CHT) and the Australasian Triage Scale (ATS) in an adult emergency department of a general hospital in China. From 2016-01 to 2017-01, twelve nurses independently performed on-site triage of 254 patients and 1552 patients to assess the scales' reliability and validity, respectively. The interrater reliability, as assessed by the weighted k scores, was 0.686 (95% CI 0.608–0.757) for the CHT and 0.731 (95% CI 0.663–0.790) for the ATS, and the k scores between the CHT and the ATS were 0.630 (95% CI 0.594–0.669). Temperature, respiration, pulse, blood oxygen saturation, waiting time, treatment time, emergency disposition, hospitalization rate, and mortality were significantly associated with the triage levels of the CHT and ATS (p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve values of the CHT and ATS for predicting intensive care treatment were 0.845 (95% CI: 0.825–0.866) and 0.740 (95% CI: 0.715–0.765), respectively. The reliability and validity of the CHT and ATS were moderate, and both of them can be used to identify critical patients in emergency departments. It is necessary to further improve the triage system in terms of structure and content.

show abstract

A comparison of a formal triage scoring system and a quick-look triage approach

Abstract: TNs assigning triage scores to ED patients on arrival, using only chief complaint and observation, were statistically comparable to scores assigned utilizing a resource-intense, comprehensive triage system, but clinically significant discrepancies were identified.

Cited by 11 publications

References 23 publications

Five-level emergency triage systems: variation in assessment of validity

Five-level emergency triage systems: variation in assessment of validity

A study of the effect of introduction of JTAS in the emergency room

Comparison of Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Four-Level and Three-District Triage Standard and the Australasian Triage Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About