Suppr超能文献

由基地医院和急诊护士分配的加拿大急诊分诊和 acuity 量表评分的观察者间一致性。

Interrater agreement of Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale scores assigned by base hospital and emergency department nurses.

机构信息

Faculté des Sciences Infirmières, Université Laval, Québec City, Quebec.

出版信息

CJEM. 2010 Jan;12(1):45-9. doi: 10.1017/s148180350001201x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the applicability of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the prehospital setting by comparing CTAS scores as--signed during ambulance transportation by base hospital (BH) nurses with CTAS scores given by emergency department (ED) nurses on patients' arrival.

METHODS

We recruited a prospective sample of consecutive patients who were transported to the ED by ambulance between December 2006 and March 2007 for whom a contact was made with the BH. Patients were triaged by the BH nurse with online communication and vital signs transmission. On arrival, patients were blindly triaged again by the ED nurse. We used the quadratic weighted kappa statistic to measure the agreement between the 2 CTAS scores.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients were triaged twice by 2 nursing teams (9 nurses at the BH and 39 nurses in the ED). The agreement obtained on prehospital and ED CTAS scores was moderate (kappa = 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.63).

CONCLUSION

The moderate interrater agreement we obtained may be a result of the changing conditions of patients during transport or may indicate that CTAS scoring requires direct contact to produce reliable triage scores. Our study casts a serious doubt on the appropriateness of BH nurses performing triage with CTAS in the prehospital setting.

摘要

目的

我们旨在通过比较基础医院(BH)护士在救护车转运期间记录的加拿大急诊分诊和 acuity 量表(CTAS)评分与急诊科护士在患者到达时记录的 CTAS 评分,评估 CTAS 在院前环境中的适用性。

方法

我们招募了 2006 年 12 月至 2007 年 3 月间通过救护车转运至急诊科的连续患者作为前瞻性样本,这些患者与 BH 取得了联系。患者通过 BH 护士进行在线沟通和生命体征传输进行分诊。到达后,由 ED 护士对患者进行盲法分诊。我们使用二次加权 kappa 统计来衡量 2 种 CTAS 评分之间的一致性。

结果

有 94 名患者由 2 个护理团队进行了两次分诊(BH 有 9 名护士,ED 有 39 名护士)。院前和 ED 的 CTAS 评分的一致性为中等(kappa=0.50;95%置信区间 0.37-0.63)。

结论

我们获得的中等评分者间一致性可能是由于患者在转运过程中病情变化,也可能表明 CTAS 评分需要直接接触才能产生可靠的分诊评分。我们的研究严重怀疑 BH 护士在院前环境中使用 CTAS 进行分诊的适宜性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验