Dalwai Mohammed, Valles Pola, Twomey Michele, Nzomukunda Yvonne, Jonjo Prince, Sasikumar Manoj, Nasim Masood, Razaaq Abdul, Gayraud Olivia, Jecrois Pierre Ronald, Wallis Lee, Tayler-Smith Katie
Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Operational Research Unit Luxembourg, Médecins Sans Frontières, Luxembourg.
BMJ Glob Health. 2017 Jun 15;2(2):e000160. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000160. eCollection 2017.
To assess the validity of the South African Triage Scale (SATS) in four Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)-supported emergency departments (ED, two trauma-only sites, one mixed site (both medical and trauma cases) and one paediatric-only site) in Afghanistan, Haiti and Sierra Leone.
This was a retrospective cohort study conducted between June 2013 and June 2014. Validity was assessed by comparing patients' SATS ratings with their final ED outcome (ie, hospital admission, death or discharge).
In the two trauma settings, the SATS demonstrated good validity: it accurately predicted an increase in the likelihood of mortality and hospitalisation across incremental acuity levels (p<0.001) and ED outcomes for 'green' and 'red' patients matched the predicted ED outcomes in 84%-99% of cases. In the mixed ED, the SATS was able to predict an incremental increase in hospitalisation (p<0.001) across both trauma and non-trauma cases. In the paediatric-only settings, SATS was able to predict an incremental increase in hospitalisation in the non-trauma cases only (p<0.001). However, 87% (non-trauma) and 94% (trauma) of 'red' patients in the mixed-medical setting were overtriaged and 76% (non-trauma) and 100% (trauma) of 'green' patients in the paediatric settings were undertriaged.
The SATS is a valid tool for trauma-only settings in low-resource countries. Its use in mixed settings seems justified, but context-specific assessments would seem prudent. Finally, in paediatric settings with endemic malaria, adding haemoglobin level to the SATS discriminator list may help to improve the undertriage of patients with malaria.
评估南非分诊量表(SATS)在阿富汗、海地和塞拉利昂的四个无国界医生组织(MSF)支持的急诊科(ED,两个仅处理创伤的地点、一个综合地点(同时处理医疗和创伤病例)以及一个仅处理儿科病例的地点)中的有效性。
这是一项在2013年6月至2014年6月期间进行的回顾性队列研究。通过将患者的SATS评分与其最终的急诊科结局(即住院、死亡或出院)进行比较来评估有效性。
在两个创伤环境中,SATS显示出良好的有效性:它准确地预测了随着 acuity 水平增加死亡率和住院可能性的增加(p<0.001),并且“绿色”和“红色”患者的急诊科结局在84%-99%的病例中与预测的急诊科结局相符。在综合急诊科中,SATS能够预测创伤和非创伤病例中住院率的逐步增加(p<0.001)。在仅处理儿科病例的环境中,SATS仅能够预测非创伤病例中住院率的逐步增加(p<0.001)。然而,在综合医疗环境中,87%(非创伤)和94%(创伤)的“红色”患者被过度分诊,在儿科环境中,76%(非创伤)和100%(创伤)的“绿色”患者被分诊不足。
SATS是低资源国家仅处理创伤环境的有效工具。在综合环境中使用似乎合理,但进行针对具体情况的评估似乎更为谨慎。最后,在疟疾流行的儿科环境中,在SATS鉴别清单中增加血红蛋白水平可能有助于改善疟疾患者的分诊不足情况。