Haukoos Jason S, Witt Mallory D, Zeumer Christel M, Lee Thomas J, Halamka John D, Lewis Roger J
Department of Emergency Medicine, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA 90509, USA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2002 Sep;9(9):880-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002.tb02188.x.
The emergency department (ED) and HIV specialty clinics are primary sources of care for persons infected with HIV. HIV disease may be complicated by vague and complex symptomatology, and determining the degree of illness at triage is often difficult. The goals of this project were to characterize the ED presentation of HIV-related conditions, to develop a clinical decision rule to triage HIV-infected patients, and to validate the rule in clinical practice.
The study population consisted of ambulatory patients with self-reported HIV infection who presented for care to the ED of a 553-bed public hospital that serves a medically indigent, minority population. An Illness Severity Instrument was developed by an expert panel to serve as the criterion standard for defining medical urgency for HIV-infected patients presenting to the ED for care. Two phases of the study were conducted. Data from the first phase, a noninterventional cohort study, were used to develop a clinical decision rule for the ED triage of HIV-infected patients. The second phase was a prospective validation of the clinical decision rule.
During phase I, data from 542 patient visits were collected. Data from 441 (81%) patient visits were used in a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis to produce a decision rule, the Clinical Triage Instrument. During phase II, the prospective validation of the Clinical Triage Instrument, 156 patient visits occurred. Of these, 88 (56%) patient visits were triaged using the Clinical Triage Instrument and could be scored using the Illness Severity Instrument. The Clinical Triage Instrument accurately triaged 45 [51%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 40% to 62%] patient visits, undertriaged 11 (13%; 95% CI = 6% to 21%) patient visits, and overtriaged 32 (36%; 95% CI = 26% to 47%) patient visits. Sensitivities and specificities for determining emergent, urgent, and nonurgent medical conditions by the Clinical Triage Instrument were 56% (95% CI = 31% to 75%) and 84% (95% CI = 74% to 92%), 71% (95% CI = 55% to 84%) and 39% (95% CI = 25% to 55%), and 18% (95% CI = 6% to 37%) and 93% (95% CI = 84% to 98%), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values for determining an emergent medical condition using the Clinical Triage Instrument were 48% (95% CI = 26% to 70%) and 88% (95% CI = 78% to 95%), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values for determining a nonurgent medical condition using the Clinical Triage Instrument were 56% (95% CI = 21% to 86%) and 71% (95% CI = 60% to 81%), respectively.
The Clinical Triage Instrument was not sufficiently accurate for clinical use. Until accurate and reliable triage methods are developed, all patients infected with HIV who present to the ED for care should receive timely evaluation and care.
急诊科(ED)和HIV专科诊所是HIV感染者的主要护理来源。HIV疾病可能伴有模糊复杂的症状,在分诊时确定疾病严重程度往往很困难。本项目的目标是描述与HIV相关疾病在急诊科的表现,制定一项用于分诊HIV感染患者的临床决策规则,并在临床实践中验证该规则。
研究人群包括自我报告感染HIV的门诊患者,他们前往一家拥有553张床位的公立医院的急诊科就诊,该医院服务于贫困的少数族裔人群。一个专家小组开发了一种疾病严重程度评估工具,作为确定前往急诊科就诊的HIV感染患者医疗紧急程度的标准。研究分两个阶段进行。第一阶段为非干预性队列研究,其数据用于制定HIV感染患者急诊科分诊的临床决策规则。第二阶段是对临床决策规则进行前瞻性验证。
在第一阶段,收集了542例患者就诊的数据。441例(81%)患者就诊的数据用于分类回归树(CART)分析,以生成一项决策规则,即临床分诊工具。在第二阶段,即临床分诊工具的前瞻性验证阶段,发生了156例患者就诊。其中,88例(56%)患者就诊使用了临床分诊工具,并可用疾病严重程度评估工具进行评分。临床分诊工具准确分诊了45例(51%;95%置信区间[95%CI]=40%至62%)患者就诊,分诊不足11例(13%;95%CI=6%至21%)患者就诊,分诊过度32例(36%;95%CI=26%至47%)患者就诊。临床分诊工具确定紧急、 urgent和非紧急医疗状况的敏感度和特异度分别为56%(95%CI=31%至75%)和84%(95%CI=74%至92%)、71%(95%CI=55%至84%)和39%(95%CI=25%至55%)、18%(95%CI=6%至37%)和93%(95%CI=84%至98%)。使用临床分诊工具确定紧急医疗状况的阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为48%(95%CI=26%至70%)和88%(95%CI=78%至95%)。使用临床分诊工具确定非紧急医疗状况的阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为56%(95%CI=21%至86%)和71%(95%CI=60%至81%)。
临床分诊工具在临床应用中不够准确。在开发出准确可靠的分诊方法之前,所有前往急诊科就诊的HIV感染患者都应接受及时评估和护理。