Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2021
Validity and reliability of the Interagency Integrated Triage Tool in a regional emergency department in Papua New Guinea.
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.
Mitchell Rob, McKup John J, Banks Colin, Nason Regina, O'Reilly Gerard, Kandelyo Scotty, Bornstein Sarah, Cole Travis, Reynolds Teri, Ripa Paulus, Körver Sarah, Cameron Peter
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The Interagency Integrated Triage Tool (IITT) is a novel, three-tier triage system recommended by the World Health Organization. The present study sought to assess the validity and reliability of a pilot version of the tool in a resource-limited ED in regional Papua New Guinea.
METHODS: This pragmatic prospective observational study, conducted at Mount Hagen Provincial Hospital, commenced 1 month after IITT implementation. The facility did not have a pre-existing triage system. All ED patients presenting within a 5-month period were included. The primary outcome was sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness, defined by 10 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.
RESULTS: There were 9437 presentations during the study period and 9175 (97.2%) had a triage category recorded. Overall, 138 (1.5%) were classified as category 1 (emergency), 1438 (15.7%) as category 2 (priority) and 7599 (82.8%) as category 3 (non-urgent). When applied by a mix of community health workers, nurses, health extension officers and doctors, the tool's sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness was 77.8% (95% confidence interval 64.4-88.0). The admission rate was 14.5% (20/138) among emergency patients, 12.0% (173/1438) among priority patients and 0.4% (30/7599) among non-urgent patients (P = 0.00). Death in the ED occurred in 13 (9.4%) of 138 emergency patients, 34 (2.4%) of 1438 priority patients and four (0.1%) of 7599 non-urgent patients (P = 0.00). The negative predictive value for these outcomes was >99.5%. Among 170 observed triage assessments, weighted κ was 0.81 (excellent agreement). On average, it took clinicians 2 min 43 s (standard deviation 1:10) to complete a triage assessment.
CONCLUSION: There is limited published data regarding the predictive validity and inter-rater reliability of the IITT. In this pragmatic study, the pilot version of the tool demonstrated adequate performance. Evaluation in other emergency care settings is recommended.
METHODS: This pragmatic prospective observational study, conducted at Mount Hagen Provincial Hospital, commenced 1 month after IITT implementation. The facility did not have a pre-existing triage system. All ED patients presenting within a 5-month period were included. The primary outcome was sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness, defined by 10 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.
RESULTS: There were 9437 presentations during the study period and 9175 (97.2%) had a triage category recorded. Overall, 138 (1.5%) were classified as category 1 (emergency), 1438 (15.7%) as category 2 (priority) and 7599 (82.8%) as category 3 (non-urgent). When applied by a mix of community health workers, nurses, health extension officers and doctors, the tool's sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness was 77.8% (95% confidence interval 64.4-88.0). The admission rate was 14.5% (20/138) among emergency patients, 12.0% (173/1438) among priority patients and 0.4% (30/7599) among non-urgent patients (P = 0.00). Death in the ED occurred in 13 (9.4%) of 138 emergency patients, 34 (2.4%) of 1438 priority patients and four (0.1%) of 7599 non-urgent patients (P = 0.00). The negative predictive value for these outcomes was >99.5%. Among 170 observed triage assessments, weighted κ was 0.81 (excellent agreement). On average, it took clinicians 2 min 43 s (standard deviation 1:10) to complete a triage assessment.
CONCLUSION: There is limited published data regarding the predictive validity and inter-rater reliability of the IITT. In this pragmatic study, the pilot version of the tool demonstrated adequate performance. Evaluation in other emergency care settings is recommended.