Suppr超能文献

一种在社区急诊科环境中评估五级分诊流程(加拿大分诊与 acuity 量表)准确性和可靠性的方法:构建拥堵测量基础设施

A method for reviewing the accuracy and reliability of a five-level triage process (canadian triage and acuity scale) in a community emergency department setting: building the crowding measurement infrastructure.

作者信息

Howlett Michael K, Atkinson Paul R T

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada B3H 3A7.

出版信息

Emerg Med Int. 2012;2012:636045. doi: 10.1155/2012/636045. Epub 2012 Jan 11.

Abstract

Objectives. Triage data are widely used to evaluate patient flow, disease severity, and emergency department (ED) workload, factors used in ED crowding evaluation and management. We defined an indicator-based methodology that can be easily used to review the accuracy of Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) performance. Methods. A trained nurse reviewer (NR) retrospectively triaged two separate month's ED charts relative to a set of clinical indicators based on CTAS Chief Complaints. Interobserver reliability and accuracy were compared using Kappa and comparative statistics. Results. There were 2838 patients in Trial 1 and 3091 in Trial 2. The rate of inconsistent triage was 14% and 16% (Kappa 0.596 and 0.604). Clinical Indicators "pain scale, chest pain, musculoskeletal injury, respiratory illness, and headache" captured 68% and 62% of visits. Conclusions. We have demonstrated a system to measure the levels of process accuracy and reliability for triage over time. We identified five key clinical indicators which captured over 60% of visits. A simple method for quality review uses a small set of indicators, capturing a majority of cases. Performance consistency and data collection using indicators may be important areas to direct training efforts.

摘要

目的。分诊数据被广泛用于评估患者流量、疾病严重程度和急诊科工作量,这些因素用于急诊科拥挤情况的评估和管理。我们定义了一种基于指标的方法,可轻松用于审查加拿大分诊与 acuity 量表(CTAS)性能的准确性。方法。一名经过培训的护士审查员(NR)根据 CTAS 主要投诉,相对于一组临床指标,对两个不同月份的急诊科病历进行回顾性分诊。使用 Kappa 和比较统计量比较观察者间的可靠性和准确性。结果。试验 1 中有 2838 名患者,试验 2 中有 3091 名患者。分诊不一致率分别为 14%和 16%(Kappa 分别为 0.596 和 0.604)。临床指标“疼痛量表、胸痛、肌肉骨骼损伤、呼吸道疾病和头痛”涵盖了 68%和 62%的就诊病例。结论。我们展示了一种随着时间推移测量分诊过程准确性和可靠性水平的系统。我们确定了五个关键临床指标,涵盖了超过 60%的就诊病例。一种简单的质量审查方法使用一小套指标,涵盖了大多数病例。使用指标的性能一致性和数据收集可能是指导培训工作的重要领域。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

7
Close only counts in horseshoes and... triage?
CJEM. 2004 Jul;6(4):288-9. doi: 10.1017/s1481803500009295.
9
Walking in--initial visualisation and assessment at triage.进入——分诊时的初步观察与评估。
Accid Emerg Nurs. 2007 Apr;15(2):73-8. doi: 10.1016/j.aaen.2006.12.008. Epub 2007 Feb 23.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验