van der Wulp I, van Baar M E, Schrijvers A J P
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, P O Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Emerg Med J. 2008 Jul;25(7):431-4. doi: 10.1136/emj.2007.055228.
To assess the reliability and validity of the Manchester Triage System (MTS) in a general emergency department patient population.
A prospective evaluation study was conducted in two general hospitals in the Netherlands. Emergency department nurses from both hospitals triaged 50 patient vignettes into one of five triage categories in the MTS. Triage ratings were compared with the ratings of two Dutch MTS experts to measure inter-rater reliability. Nineteen days after triaging the patient vignettes, triage nurses were asked to rate the same vignettes again to measure test-retest reliability. Reliability in relation to the work experience of emergency department nurses was also studied. Validity was assessed by calculating percentages for overtriage, undertriage, sensitivity and specificity.
Inter-rater reliability was "substantial" (weighted kappa 0.62 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.65)) and test-retest reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.75 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.77)). No significant association was found between the experience of emergency department nurses and the reliability score (kappa). Undertriage occurred more frequently than overtriage, especially in elderly patients (25.3% vs 7.6%). Sensitivity for urgent patients in the MTS was 53.2% and specificity was 95.1%. The patient vignettes representing children aged <16 years revealed a higher sensitivity (83.3%).
Inter-rater reliability is "moderate" to "substantial" and test-retest reliability is high. The reliability of the MTS is not influenced by nurses' work experience. Undertriage mainly occurs in the MTS categories orange and yellow. The MTS is more sensitive for children who need immediate or urgent care than for other patients in the emergency department.
评估曼彻斯特分诊系统(MTS)在综合急诊科患者群体中的可靠性和有效性。
在荷兰的两家综合医院进行了一项前瞻性评估研究。两家医院的急诊科护士将50个患者病例分诊到MTS的五个分诊类别之一。将分诊评级与两名荷兰MTS专家的评级进行比较,以衡量评分者间的可靠性。在对患者病例进行分诊19天后,要求分诊护士再次对相同病例进行评级,以衡量重测可靠性。还研究了与急诊科护士工作经验相关的可靠性。通过计算过度分诊、分诊不足、敏感性和特异性的百分比来评估有效性。
评分者间可靠性为“高度一致”(加权kappa值0.62(95%可信区间0.60至0.65)),重测可靠性较高(组内相关系数0.75(95%可信区间0.72至0.77))。未发现急诊科护士的经验与可靠性评分(kappa值)之间存在显著关联。分诊不足比过度分诊更频繁发生,尤其是在老年患者中(25.3%对7.6%)。MTS对紧急患者的敏感性为53.2%,特异性为95.1%。代表年龄<16岁儿童的患者病例显示出更高的敏感性(83.3%)。
评分者间可靠性为“中等”至“高度一致”,重测可靠性较高。MTS的可靠性不受护士工作经验的影响。分诊不足主要发生在MTS的橙色和黄色类别中。与急诊科的其他患者相比,MTS对需要立即或紧急护理的儿童更敏感。