Suppr超能文献

中低收入国家急诊科分诊工具的信度和效度:系统评价。

Reliability and validity of emergency department triage tools in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins Hospital.

Global Emergency Services, Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins Hospital.

出版信息

Eur J Emerg Med. 2018 Jun;25(3):154-160. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000445.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Despite the universal acknowledgment that triage is necessary to prioritize emergency care, there is no review that provides an overview of triage tools evaluated and utilized in resource-poor settings, such as low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We seek to quantify and evaluate studies evaluating triage tools in LMICs.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature between 2000 and 2015 to identify studies that evaluated the reliability and validity of triage tools for adult emergency care in LMICs. Studies were then evaluated for the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included in the review, evaluating six triage tools. Three of the 18 studies were in low-income countries and none were in rural hospitals. Two of the six tools had evaluations of reliability. Each tool positively predicted clinical outcomes, although the variety in resource environments limited ability to compare the predictive nature of any one tool. The South African Triage Scale had the highest quality of evidence. In comparison with high-income countries, the review showed fewer studies evaluating reliability and presented a higher number of studies with small sample sizes that decreased the overall quality of evidence.

CONCLUSION

The quality of evidence supporting any single triage tool's validity and reliability in LMICs is moderate at best. Research on triage tool applicability in low-resource environments must be targeted to the actual clinical environment where the tool will be utilized, and must include low-income countries and rural, primary care settings.

摘要

目的

尽管普遍认为分诊对于优先考虑紧急护理是必要的,但没有审查提供了在资源匮乏环境中(例如中低收入国家)评估和使用的分诊工具的概述。我们旨在量化和评估在中低收入国家评估分诊工具的研究。

方法

我们对 2000 年至 2015 年的文献进行了系统审查,以确定评估中低收入国家成人紧急护理分诊工具的可靠性和有效性的研究。然后,使用 GRADE 标准评估研究的总体证据质量。

结果

审查包括 18 项研究,评估了 6 种分诊工具。其中 3 项研究来自低收入国家,没有研究来自农村医院。6 种工具中有 2 种进行了可靠性评估。每种工具均对临床结局进行了积极预测,尽管资源环境的多样性限制了对任何一种工具的预测性质进行比较的能力。南非分诊量表具有最高质量的证据。与高收入国家相比,该审查显示评估可靠性的研究较少,并且具有较小样本量的研究数量较多,从而降低了总体证据质量。

结论

在中低收入国家,支持任何单一分诊工具的有效性和可靠性的证据质量充其量只是中等的。在低资源环境中对分诊工具适用性的研究必须针对工具将被使用的实际临床环境,并且必须包括低收入国家和农村初级保健环境。

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