Project description:IntroductionCanadian patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) typically undergo a triage process where they are assessed by a specially trained nurse and assigned a Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) score, indicating their level of acuity and urgency of assessment. We sought to assess the ability of patients to self-triage themselves through use of one of two of our proprietary self-triage tools, and how this would compare with the standard nurse-driven triage process.MethodsWe enrolled a convenience sample of ambulatory ED patients aged 17 years or older who presented with chief complaints of chest pain, abdominal pain, breathing problems, or musculoskeletal pain. Participants completed one, or both, of an algorithm generated self-triage (AGST) survey, or visual acuity scale (VAS) based self-triage tool which subsequently generated a CTAS score. Our primary outcome was to assess the accuracy of these tools to the CTAS score generated through the nurse-driven triage process.ResultsA total of 223 patients were included in our analysis. Of these, 32 (14.3%) presented with chest pain, 25 (11.2%) with shortness of breath, 75 (33.6%) with abdominal pain, and 91 (40.8%) with musculoskeletal pain. Of the total number of patients, 142 (47.2%) completed the AGST tool, 159 (52.8%) completed the VAS tool and 78 (25.9%) completed both tools. When compared to the nurse-driven triage standard, both the AGST and VAS tools had poor levels of agreement for each of the four presenting complaints.ConclusionsSelf-triage through use of an AGST or VAS tool is inaccurate compared to the established standard of nurse-driven triage. Although existing literature exists which suggests that self-triage tools developed for specific subsets of complaints may be feasible, our results would suggest that adopting the self-triage approach on a broader scale for all-comers to the ED does not appear to be a viable option to enhance the current triage process. Further study is required to show if self-triage can be used in the ED to optimize the triage process.

Project description:BackgroundThe Interagency Integrated Triage Tool (IITT) is a three-tier triage system designed for resource-limited emergency care (EC) settings. This study sought to assess the validity and reliability of a pilot version of the tool in an urban emergency department (ED) in Papua New Guinea.MethodsA pragmatic observational study was conducted at Gerehu General Hospital in Port Moresby, commencing eight weeks after IITT implementation. All ED patients presenting within the subsequent two-month period were included. Triage assessments were performed by a variety of ED clinicians, including community health workers, nurses and doctors. The primary outcome was sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness, defined by ten pre-specified diagnoses. The association between triage category and ED outcomes was examined using Cramer's V correlation coefficient. Reliability was assessed by inter-rater agreement between a local and an experienced, external triage officer.FindingsAmong 4512 presentations during the study period, 58 (1.3%) were classified as category one (emergency), 967 (21.6%) as category two (priority) and 3478 (77.1%) as category three (non-urgent). The tool's sensitivity for detecting the pre-specified set of time-sensitive conditions was 70.8% (95%CI 58.2-81.4%), with negative predictive values of 97.3% (95%CI 96.7 - 97.8%) for admission/transfer and 99.9% (95%CI 99.7 - 100.0%) for death. The admission/transfer rate was 44.8% (26/58) among emergency patients, 22.9% (223/976) among priority patients and 2.7% (94/3478) among non-urgent patients (Cramer's V=0.351, p=0.00). Four of 58 (6.9%) emergency patients, 19/976 (2.0%) priority patients and 3/3478 (0.1%) non-urgent patients died in the ED (Cramer's V=0.14, p=0.00). The under-triage rate was 2.7% (94/3477) and the over-triage rate 48.2% (28/58), both within pre-specified limits of acceptability. On average, it took staff 3 minutes 34 seconds (SD 1:06) to determine and document a triage category. Among 70 observed assessments, weighted κ was 0.84 (excellent agreement).InterpretationThe pilot version of the IITT demonstrated acceptable performance characteristics, and validation in other EC settings is warranted.FundingThis project was funded through a Friendship Grant from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and an International Development Fund Grant from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundWith the aging society, the number of emergency transportations has been growing. Although it is important that a patient be immediately transported to an appropriate hospital for proper management, accurate diagnosis in the prehospital setting is challenging. However, at present, patient information is mainly communicated by telephone, which has a potential risk of communication errors such as mishearing. Sharing correct and detailed prehospital information with emergency departments (EDs) should facilitate optimal patient care and resource use. Therefore, the implementation of an app that provides on-site, real-time information to emergency physicians could be useful for early preparation, intervention, and effective use of medical and human resources.ObjectiveIn this paper, we aimed to examine whether the implementation of a mobile app for emergency medical service (EMS) would improve patient outcomes and reduce transportation time as well as communication time by phone (ie, phone-communication time).MethodsWe performed an interrupted time-series analysis (ITSA) on the data from a tertiary care hospital in Japan from July 2021 to October 2021 (8 weeks before and 8 weeks after the implementation period). We included all patients transported by EMS. Using the mobile app, EMS can send information on patient demographics, vital signs, medications, and photos of the scene to the ED. The outcome measure was inpatient mortality and transportation time, as well as phone-communication time, which was the time for EMS to negotiate with ED staffs for transport requests.ResultsDuring the study period, 1966 emergency transportations were made (n=1033, 53% patients during the preimplementation period and n=933, 47% patients after the implementation period). The ITSA did not reveal a significant decrease in patient mortality and transportation time before and after the implementation. However, the ITSA revealed a significant decrease in mean phone-communication time between pre- and postimplementation periods (from 216 to 171 seconds; -45 seconds; 95% CI -71 to -18 seconds). From the pre- to postimplementation period, the mean transportation time from EMS request to ED arrival decreased by 0.29 minutes (from 36.1 minutes to 35.9 minutes; 95% CI -2.20 to 1.60 minutes), without change in time trends. We also introduced cases where the app allowed EMS to share accurate and detailed prehospital information with the emergency department, resulting in timely intervention and reducing the burden on the ED.ConclusionsThe implementation of a mobile app for EMS was associated with reduced phone-communication time by 45 seconds (22%) without increasing mortality or overall transportation time despite the implementation of new methods in the real clinical setting. In addition, real-time patient information sharing, such as the transfer of monitor images and photos of the accident site, could facilitate optimal patient care and resource use.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic discharge communication tools (EDCTs) are increasingly common in pediatric emergency departments (EDs). These tools have been shown to improve patient-centered communication, support postdischarge care at home, and reduce unnecessary return visits to the ED.ObjectiveThis study aimed to map and assess the evidence base for EDCTs used in pediatric EDs according to their functionalities, intended purpose, implementation context features, and outcomes.MethodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) procedures for identification, screening, and eligibility. A total of 7 databases (EBSCO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for studies published between 1989 and 2021. Studies evaluating discharge communication-related outcomes using electronic tools (eg, text messages, videos, and kiosks) in pediatric EDs were included. In all, 2 researchers independently assessed the eligibility. Extracted data related to study identification, methodology, settings and demographics, intervention features, outcome implementation features, and practice, policy, and research implications. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was used to assess methodological quality. The synthesis of results involved structured tabulation, vote counting, recoding into common metrics, inductive thematic analysis, descriptive statistics, and heat mapping.ResultsIn total, 231 full-text articles and abstracts were screened for review inclusion with 49 reports (representing 55 unique tools) included. In all, 70% (26/37) of the studies met at least three of five Mixed Method Appraisal Tool criteria. The most common EDCTs were videos, text messages, kiosks, and phone calls. The time required to use the tools ranged from 120 seconds to 80 minutes. The EDCTs were evaluated for numerous presenting conditions (eg, asthma, fracture, head injury, fever, and otitis media) that required a range of at-home care needs after the ED visit. The most frequently measured outcomes were knowledge acquisition, caregiver and patient beliefs and attitudes, and health service use. Unvalidated self-report measures were typically used for measurement. Health care provider satisfaction or system-level impacts were infrequently measured in studies. The directionality of primary outcomes pointed to positive effects for the primary measure (44/55, 80%) or no significant difference (10/55, 18%). Only one study reported negative findings, with an increase in return visits to the ED after receiving the intervention compared with the control group.ConclusionsThis review is the first to map the broad literature of EDCTs used in pediatric EDs. The findings suggest a promising evidence base, demonstrating that EDCTs have been successfully integrated across clinical contexts and deployed via diverse technological modalities. Although caregiver and patient satisfaction with EDCTs is high, future research should use robust trials using consistent measures of communication quality, clinician experience, cost-effectiveness, and health service use to accumulate evidence regarding these outcomes.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020157500; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=157500.

Project description:BackgroundFor several decades, emergency departments (EDs) utilization has increased, inducing ED overcrowding in many countries. This phenomenon is related partly to an excessive number of nonurgent patients. To resolve ED overcrowding and to decrease nonurgent visits, the most common solution has been to triage the ED patients to identify potentially nonurgent patients, i.e. which could have been dealt with by general practitioner. The objective of this study was to measure agreement among ED health professionals on the urgency of an ED visit, and to determine if the level of agreement is consistent among different sub-groups based on following explicit criteria: age, medical status, type of referral to the ED, investigations performed in the ED, and the discharge from the ED.MethodsWe conducted a multicentric cross-sectional study to compare agreement between nurses and physicians on categorization of ED visits into urgent or nonurgent. Subgroups stratified by criteria characterizing the ED visit were analyzed in relation to the outcome of the visit.ResultsOf 1,928 ED patients, 350 were excluded because data were lacking. The overall nurse-physician agreement on categorization was moderate (kappa = 0.43). The levels of agreement within all subgroups were variable and low. The highest agreement concerned three subgroups of complaints: cranial injury (kappa = 0.61), gynaecological (kappa = 0.66) and toxicology complaints (kappa = 1.00). The lowest agreement concerned two subgroups: urinary-nephrology (kappa = 0.09) and hospitalization (kappa = 0.20). When categorization of ED visits into urgent or nonurgent cases was compared to hospitalization, ED physicians had higher sensitivity and specificity than nurses (respectively 94.9% versus 89.5%, and 43.1% versus 30.9%).ConclusionsThe lack of physician-nurse agreement and the inability to predict hospitalization have important implications for patient safety. When urgency screening is used to determine treatment priority, disagreement might not matter because all patients in the ED are seen and treated. But using assessments as the basis for refusal of care to potential nonurgent patients raises legal, ethical, and safety issues. Managed care organizations should be cautious when applying such criteria to restrict access to EDs.

Project description:BackgroundOvercrowding in emergency departments is a worldwide problem. A systematic literature review was undertaken to scientifically explore which interventions improve patient flow in emergency departments.MethodsA systematic literature search for flow processes in emergency departments was followed by assessment of relevance and methodological quality of each individual study fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Studies were excluded if they did not present data on waiting time, length of stay, patients leaving the emergency department without being seen or other flow parameters based on a nonselected material of patients. Only studies with a control group, either in a randomized controlled trial or in an observational study with historical controls, were included. For each intervention, the level of scientific evidence was rated according to the GRADE system, launched by a WHO-supported working group.ResultsThe interventions were grouped into streaming, fast track, team triage, point-of-care testing (performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department), and nurse-requested x-ray. Thirty-three studies, including over 800,000 patients in total, were included. Scientific evidence on the effect of fast track on waiting time, length of stay, and left without being seen was moderately strong. The effect of team triage on left without being seen was relatively strong, but the evidence for all other interventions was limited or insufficient.ConclusionsIntroducing fast track for patients with less severe symptoms results in shorter waiting time, shorter length of stay, and fewer patients leaving without being seen. Team triage, with a physician in the team, will probably result in shorter waiting time and shorter length of stay and most likely in fewer patients leaving without being seen. There is only limited scientific evidence that streaming of patients into different tracks, performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department or having nurses to request certain x-rays results in shorter waiting time and length of stay.

Project description:IntroductionAdvanced practice providers (APP), including physicians' assistants and nurse practitioners, have been increasingly incorporated into emergency department (ED) staffing over the past decade. There is scant literature examining resource utilization and the cost benefit of having APPs in the ED. The objectives of this study were to compare resource utilization in EDs that use APPs in their staffing model with those that do not and to estimate costs associated with the utilized resources.MethodsIn this five-year retrospective secondary data analysis of the Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA), we compared resource utilization rates in EDs with and without APPs in non-academic EDs. Primary outcomes were hospital admission and use of computed tomography (CT), radiography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Costs were estimated using the 2014 physician fee schedule and inpatient payments from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We measured outcomes as rates per 100 visits. Data were analyzed using a mixed linear model with repeated measures, adjusted for annual volume, patient acuity, and attending hours. We used the adjusted net difference to project utilization costs between the two groups per 1000 visits.ResultsOf the 1054 EDs included in this study, 79% employed APPs. Relative to EDs without APPs, EDs staffing APPs had higher resource utilization rates (use per 100 visits): 3.0 more admissions (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-4.1), 1.7 more CTs (95% CI, 0.2-3.1), 4.5 more radiographs (95% CI, 2.2-6.9), and 1.0 more ultrasound (95% CI, 0.3-1.7) but comparable MRI use 0.1 (95% CI, -0.2-0.3). Projected costs of these differences varied among the resource utilized. Compared to EDs without APPs, EDs with APPs were estimated to have 30.4 more admissions per 1000 visits, which could accrue $414,717 in utilization costs.ConclusionEDs staffing APPs were associated with modest increases in resource utilization as measured by admissions and imaging studies.

Dataset Information

Triage implementation in resource-limited emergency departments: sharing tools and experience from the Pacific region

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets