International emergency nursing · 2020
Effectiveness of Manchester Triage System in risk prioritisation of patients with pulmonary embolism who present dyspnoea, chest pain or collapse.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zaboli Arian, Turcato Gianni, Solazzo Pasquale, Sorrento Daniele, Zorzi Elisabetta, Marsoner Tania, Magnarelli Gabriele, Pfeifer Norbert
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recognising patients with pulmonary embolism continues to be a clinical challenge. In the Emergency Department, up to 50% of patients with pulmonary embolism can be delayed or even misdiagnosed. The ability of a triage system to correctly prioritise suspected embolism in these patients is fundamental for determining diagnostic-therapeutic procedures.
AIM: To verify the effectiveness of the Manchester Triage System in risk prioritisation of patients with pulmonary embolism who present with dyspnoea, chest pain, or collapse.
METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, study the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Manchester Triage System were calculated using the triage classification for these patients, and their established diagnoses. The analysis included baseline characteristics and triage evaluations.
RESULTS: During the two-year study period, 7055 patients were enrolled. Pulmonary embolism episodes were 2.1% of all cases, while severe pulmonary embolisms were 0.8%. The estimated specificity of the Manchester Triage System was 72.5% (CI 95%, 71.5-73.6), and the negative predictive value was 98.1% (CI 95%, 97.7-98.5). The results suggest that clinical characteristics leading to a high Manchester Triage System priority are similar to those characterising a pulmonary embolism episode.
CONCLUSIONS: Although pulmonary embolism is difficult to diagnose, the Manchester Triage System is an effective tool for prioritising patients with symptoms of this disease.
AIM: To verify the effectiveness of the Manchester Triage System in risk prioritisation of patients with pulmonary embolism who present with dyspnoea, chest pain, or collapse.
METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, study the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Manchester Triage System were calculated using the triage classification for these patients, and their established diagnoses. The analysis included baseline characteristics and triage evaluations.
RESULTS: During the two-year study period, 7055 patients were enrolled. Pulmonary embolism episodes were 2.1% of all cases, while severe pulmonary embolisms were 0.8%. The estimated specificity of the Manchester Triage System was 72.5% (CI 95%, 71.5-73.6), and the negative predictive value was 98.1% (CI 95%, 97.7-98.5). The results suggest that clinical characteristics leading to a high Manchester Triage System priority are similar to those characterising a pulmonary embolism episode.
CONCLUSIONS: Although pulmonary embolism is difficult to diagnose, the Manchester Triage System is an effective tool for prioritising patients with symptoms of this disease.