• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

儿科急诊分诊系统的可靠性:系统评价。

Reliability of triage systems for paediatric emergency care: a systematic review.

机构信息

Instituto D'Or de Pesquisa e Ensino (IDOR), Instituto de Medicina Social (IMS) da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Instituto D'Or de Pesquisa e Ensino (IDOR), Departamento de Pediatria da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Instituto de Puericultura e Pediatria Martagão Gesteira (IPPMG)-UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

出版信息

Emerg Med J. 2019 Apr;36(4):231-238. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2018-207781. Epub 2019 Jan 10.

DOI:10.1136/emermed-2018-207781
PMID:30630838
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To present a systematic review on the reliability of triage systems for paediatric emergency care.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Nursing Database Index and Spanish Health Sciences Bibliographic Index for articles in English, French, Portuguese or Spanish was conducted to identify reliability studies of five-level triage systems for patients aged 0-18 years published up to April 2018. Two reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and quality assessment as recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

Twenty studies on nine triage systems were selected: the National Triage System (n=1); the Australasian Triage Scale (n=3); the paediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (PedCTAS) (n=5); the Manchester Triage System (MTS) (n=1); the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) (n=5); an adaptation of the South African Triage Scale for the Princess Marina Hospital in Botswana (n=1); the Soterion Rapid Triage System (n=1); the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-paediatric version (n=2); the Paediatric Risk Classification Protocol (n=1). Ten studies were performed with actual patients, while the others used hypothetical scenarios. The studies were rated low (n=14) or moderate (n=6) quality. Kappa was the most used statistic, although many studies did not specify the weighting. PedCTAS, MTS and ESI V.4 exhibited substantial to almost perfect agreement in moderate quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence on the reliability of the PedCTAS, MTS and ESI V.4, but most studies are limited to the countries where they were developed. Efforts are needed to improve the quality of the studies, and cross-cultural adaptation of those tools is recommended in countries with different professional qualification and sociocultural contexts.

摘要

目的

对儿科急救护理分类系统的可靠性进行系统评价。

方法

检索 MEDLINE、Cochrane 图书馆、拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学文献、科学电子图书馆在线、护理数据库索引和西班牙健康科学文献索引,以获取截至 2018 年 4 月发表的 0-18 岁患者使用五层级分类系统的可靠性研究,语言为英语、法语、葡萄牙语或西班牙语。由两名评审员按照系统评价和荟萃分析报告的首选条目进行研究选择、数据提取和质量评估。

结果

共选择了 20 项涉及 9 个分类系统的研究:国家分类系统(n=1);澳大利亚分类量表(n=3);儿科加拿大分类和 acuity 量表(PedCTAS)(n=5);曼彻斯特分类系统(MTS)(n=1);紧急严重程度指数(ESI)(n=5);博茨瓦纳 Princess Marina 医院南非分类量表的改编版(n=1);Soterion 快速分类系统(n=1);快速紧急分类和治疗系统-儿科版(n=2);儿科风险分类方案(n=1)。其中 10 项研究采用了实际患者,其余研究采用了假设场景。这些研究的质量评级为低(n=14)或中(n=6)。kappa 是最常用的统计量,尽管许多研究未指定权重。在中等质量研究中,PedCTAS、MTS 和 ESI V.4 显示出实质性到几乎完美的一致性。

结论

有一些关于 PedCTAS、MTS 和 ESI V.4 可靠性的证据,但大多数研究仅限于这些工具的开发国家。需要努力提高研究质量,并建议在具有不同专业资格和社会文化背景的国家对这些工具进行跨文化适应性调整。

相似文献

1
Reliability of triage systems for paediatric emergency care: a systematic review.儿科急诊分诊系统的可靠性:系统评价。
Emerg Med J. 2019 Apr;36(4):231-238. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2018-207781. Epub 2019 Jan 10.
2
Validity of triage systems for paediatric emergency care: a systematic review.儿科急诊分诊系统的有效性:系统评价。
Emerg Med J. 2017 Nov;34(11):711-719. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2016-206058. Epub 2017 Oct 4.
3
Reliability and validity of triage systems in paediatric emergency care.儿科急诊分诊系统的可靠性和有效性。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2009 Aug 27;17:38. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-17-38.
4
Pediatric emergency triage systems.儿科急诊分诊系统。
Rev Paul Pediatr. 2022 Jul 15;41:e2021038. doi: 10.1590/1984-0462/2023/41/2021038. eCollection 2022.
5
Triage Performance in Emergency Medicine: A Systematic Review.急诊医学分诊性能:系统评价。
Ann Emerg Med. 2019 Jul;74(1):140-152. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.09.022. Epub 2018 Nov 22.
6
The reliability of the Manchester Triage System (MTS): a meta-analysis.曼彻斯特分诊系统(MTS)的可靠性:一项荟萃分析。
J Evid Based Med. 2017 May;10(2):129-135. doi: 10.1111/jebm.12231.
7
Modern triage in the emergency department.现代急诊科分诊。
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 Dec;107(50):892-8. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0892. Epub 2010 Dec 17.
8
Reliability of a computerized version of the Pediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale.加拿大儿科分诊与 acuity 量表计算机化版本的可靠性。 (注:这里“acuity”可能是特定领域术语,结合语境可能指“ acuity scale” 为 “急症严重程度量表” 等类似含义,但仅根据提供文本只能按原样翻译)
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Oct;14(10):864-9. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.018. Epub 2007 Aug 29.
9
A systematic review on the validity and reliability of an emergency department triage scale, the Manchester Triage System.关于急诊科分诊量表——曼彻斯特分诊系统的有效性和可靠性的系统评价。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2014 Jul;51(7):1062-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.01.013. Epub 2014 Feb 2.
10
Inter-rater reliability between nurses for a new paediatric triage system based primarily on vital parameters: the Paediatric Triage Instrument (PETI).一种主要基于生命体征参数的新型儿科分诊系统——儿科分诊工具(PETI)在护士之间的评分者间信度。
BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 23;7(2):e012748. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012748.

引用本文的文献

1
Outcomes of pediatric patients prioritized as critical (P1/P2) by registered triage nurses from a tertiary care hospital in a low-middle-income country.来自一个低收入中等收入国家的三级医院的注册分诊护士将其列为危急(P1/P2)的儿科患者的治疗结果。
J Med Life. 2025 Jan;18(1):48-53. doi: 10.25122/jml-2024-0228.
2
Comparison between the Smart Triage model and the Emergency Triage Assessment and Treatment guidelines in triaging children presenting to the emergency departments of two public hospitals in Kenya.肯尼亚两家公立医院急诊科对儿童进行分诊时,智能分诊模型与急诊分诊评估与治疗指南的比较。
PLOS Digit Health. 2024 Aug 1;3(8):e0000408. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000408. eCollection 2024 Aug.
3
Validation of a five-level triage system in pediatric trauma and the effectiveness of triage nurse modification: A multi-center cohort analysis.
儿科创伤五级分诊系统的验证及分诊护士调整的有效性:一项多中心队列分析。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Nov 1;9:947501. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.947501. eCollection 2022.
4
Variation in low-value radiograph use for children in the emergency department: a cross-sectional study of administrative databases.低价值 X 光片在急诊科儿童中的使用情况存在差异:一项基于行政数据库的横断面研究。
CMAJ Open. 2022 Oct 11;10(4):E889-E899. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20210140. Print 2022 Sep-Oct.
5
Clinical management of fever in children in Brazil: practical recommendations from an expert panel.巴西儿童发热的临床管理:专家小组的实用建议。
Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2022 Aug 8;20:eRW6045. doi: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2022RW6045. eCollection 2022.
6
Pediatric emergency triage systems.儿科急诊分诊系统。
Rev Paul Pediatr. 2022 Jul 15;41:e2021038. doi: 10.1590/1984-0462/2023/41/2021038. eCollection 2022.
7
Validation of the Computerized Pediatric Triage Tool, , in the Pediatric Emergency Department of Lenval Children's Hospital in Nice: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.法国尼斯莱瓦尔儿童医院急诊科计算机化儿科分诊工具的验证:一项横断面观察性研究
Front Pediatr. 2022 Apr 26;10:840181. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.840181. eCollection 2022.
8
The association between prehospital vital signs of children and their critical clinical outcomes at hospitals.儿童院前生命体征与医院危急临床结局的关联。
Sci Rep. 2022 Mar 25;12(1):5199. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-09271-0.
9
Pediatric early warning score versus a paediatric triage tool in the emergency department: A reliability study.儿科早期预警评分与急诊科儿科分诊工具的比较:一项可靠性研究。
Nurs Open. 2021 Mar;8(2):702-708. doi: 10.1002/nop2.675. Epub 2020 Nov 11.
10
Characteristics and outcome of patients triaged by telephone and transported by ambulance: a population-based study in Osaka, Japan.通过电话分诊并由救护车转运的患者的特征与结局:日本大阪的一项基于人群的研究
Acute Med Surg. 2020 Nov 28;7(1):e609. doi: 10.1002/ams2.609. eCollection 2020 Jan-Dec.