Bergeron Sylvie, Gouin Serge, Bailey Benoît, Patel Hema
Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Hôpital Sainte-Justine, Université de Montréal, 3175 Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3T 1C5.
Acad Emerg Med. 2002 Dec;9(12):1397-401. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002.tb01608.x.
To compare triage level assignments, using simulated written case scenarios, in a pediatric emergency department (ED) among registered nurses (RNs) and pediatric emergency physicians (PEPs) and to compare the triage level assignments among RNs and PEPs with a consensus criterion standard.
This was a cross-sectional mailed questionnaire survey. The study was conducted at a pediatric tertiary care center with more than 65,000 annual patient visits. Participants were PEPs and RNs working in the ED. Dillman's Total Design Method, with three mailouts, was used for questionnaire construction and implementation. The survey included 55 case scenarios of patients presenting to the ED. Participants were instructed to assign triage level on each case, using the following four-level triage scale: 1 = resuscitation/emergent, 2 = urgent, 3 = less-urgent, and 4 = non-urgent. A priori, all cases were assigned a triage level by consensus agreement of three PEPs, using established triage guidelines from the RNs' teaching manual. Kappa statistics (95% CI) and the mean percentage of correct responses (+/-1 SD) were calculated.
There was a 100% response rate (39 RNs, 24 PEPs). The kappa level of agreement (95% CI) was 0.453 (0.447 to 0.459) among the RNs and was 0.419 (0.409 to 0.429) among the PEPs. The mean percentage of correct responses (+/-1 SD) for the RNs was 64.2% (+/-8.0%) and for the PEPs was 53.5% (+/-8.1%, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference within groups by experience level (< 10 vs. > or =10 years) or by the type of work schedule (day vs. evening vs. overnight) or full-time vs. part-time status.
The level of agreement and accuracy of triage assignment was only moderate for both RNs and PEPs. Triage, a crucial step in emergency care, requires improved measurement.
在儿科急诊科(ED)中,通过模拟书面病例场景,比较注册护士(RN)和儿科急诊医生(PEP)的分诊级别分配情况,并将RN和PEP的分诊级别分配与共识标准进行比较。
这是一项横断面邮寄问卷调查。该研究在一家年门诊量超过65000人次的儿科三级护理中心进行。参与者为在急诊科工作的PEP和RN。采用迪尔曼的全面设计方法,分三次邮寄问卷进行构建和实施。调查包括55个到急诊科就诊患者的病例场景。要求参与者使用以下四级分诊量表对每个病例进行分诊级别分配:1 = 复苏/紧急,2 = 紧急,3 = 次紧急,4 = 非紧急。事先,由三名PEP根据RN教学手册中的既定分诊指南,通过共识协议为所有病例分配一个分诊级别。计算卡方统计量(95%置信区间)和正确回答的平均百分比(±1标准差)。
回复率为100%(39名RN,24名PEP)。RN之间的卡方一致性水平(95%置信区间)为0.453(0.447至0.459),PEP之间为0.419(0.409至0.429)。RN正确回答的平均百分比(±1标准差)为64.2%(±8.0%),PEP为53.5%(±8.1%,p < 0.01)。在不同经验水平(< 10年与≥10年)、工作时间表类型(白班与夜班与通宵班)或全职与兼职状态的组内,均无显著差异。
RN和PEP的分诊分配一致性水平和准确性仅为中等。分诊作为急诊护理的关键步骤,需要改进评估方法。