Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53226, USA.
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2010 Jan-Mar;14(1):21-5. doi: 10.3109/10903120903349812.
To determine the accuracy of SALT (sort-assess-lifesaving interventions-treatment/transport) triage during a simulated mass-casualty incident, the average time it takes to make triage designations, and providers' opinions of SALT triage.
Seventy-three trainees participating in one of two disaster courses were taught to use SALT triage during a 30-minute lecture. The following day they participated in teams, in one of eight simulated mass-casualty incidents. For each incident trainees were told to assess and prioritize all victims. Each scenario comprised 28 to 30 victims, including 10 to 11 moulaged manikins and 18 to 20 moulaged actors. Each victim had a card that stated the victim's respiratory effort, pulse quality, and ability to follow commands. Initial and final assigned triage categories were recorded and compared with the intended category. Ten of the victims were equipped with stopwatches to measure the triage time interval. Timing began when the trainee approached the victim and ended when the trainee verbalized his or her triage designation. The times were averaged and standard deviations were calculated. After the drill, trainees were asked to complete a survey regarding their experience.
There were 217 victim observations. The initial triage was correct for 81% of the observations; 8% were overtriaged and 11% were undertriaged. The final triage was correct for 83% of the observations; 6% were overtriaged and 10% were undertriaged. The mean triage interval was 28 seconds (+/- 22; range: 4-94). Nine percent reported that prior to the drill they felt very confident using SALT triage and 33% were not confident. After the drill, no one reported not feeling confident using SALT triage, 26% were at the same level of confidence, 74% felt more confident, and none felt less confident. Before the drill, 53% of the respondents felt SALT triage was easier to use than their current disaster triage protocol, 44% felt it was similar, and 3% felt it was more difficult. After the drill, no one reported that SALT triage was more difficult to use.
We found that assessments using SALT triage were accurate and made quickly during a simulated incident. The accuracy rate was higher than those published for other triage systems and of similar speed. Providers also felt confident using SALT triage and found it was similar or easier to use than their current triage protocol. Using SALT triage during a drill improved confidence.
确定 SALT（分类-评估-救命干预-治疗/转运）分诊在模拟大规模伤亡事件中的准确性、进行分诊指定所需的平均时间，以及医务人员对 SALT 分诊的看法。
73 名参加两次灾害课程之一的学员在 30 分钟的讲座中接受了 SALT 分诊的教学。第二天，他们作为团队成员参与了 8 个模拟大规模伤亡事件中的 1 个。对于每个事件，学员都要对所有受害者进行评估和优先级排序。每个场景包括 28 至 30 名受害者，其中 10 至 11 名为模拟假人，18 至 20 名为模拟演员。每位受害者都有一张卡片，说明受害者的呼吸努力、脉搏质量和听从命令的能力。记录初始和最终分配的分诊类别，并与预期类别进行比较。10 名受害者配备了秒表来测量分诊时间间隔。计时从学员接近受害者开始，到学员说出分诊指定结束。计算平均时间和标准差。演习后，学员被要求完成一项关于他们的经验的调查。
共观察了 217 名受害者。81%的观察结果初始分诊正确；8%分诊过度，11%分诊不足。最终分诊正确的有 83%的观察结果；6%分诊过度，10%分诊不足。平均分诊间隔为 28 秒（+/-22；范围：4-94）。9%的人表示，在演习之前，他们对使用 SALT 分诊非常有信心，而 33%的人没有信心。演习后，没有人表示对使用 SALT 分诊没有信心，26%的人信心水平相同，74%的人更有信心，没有人感到信心不足。演习前，53%的受访者表示 SALT 分诊比他们目前的灾难分诊方案更容易使用，44%的人认为类似，3%的人认为更难。演习后，没有人报告 SALT 分诊更难使用。
我们发现，在模拟事件中，使用 SALT 分诊进行评估是准确和快速的。准确率高于其他分诊系统公布的准确率，速度也相似。医务人员对 SALT 分诊也有信心，并且发现它与他们目前的分诊方案相似或更容易使用。在演习中使用 SALT 分诊提高了信心。
