Suppr超能文献

使用韩国分诊和 acuity 量表评估分诊准确性和分诊错误的原因。

Triage accuracy and causes of mistriage using the Korean Triage and Acuity Scale.

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Changwon National University, Changwon, South Korea.

Department of Nursing, Dongguk University, Gyeongju, South Korea.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2019 Sep 6;14(9):e0216972. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216972. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To identify emergency department triage accuracy using the Korean Triage and Acuity Scale (KTAS) and evaluate the causes of mistriage.

METHODS

This cross-sectional retrospective study was based on 1267 systematically selected records of adult patients admitted to two emergency departments between October 2016 and September 2017. Twenty-four variables were assessed, including chief complaints, vital signs according to the initial nursing records, and clinical outcomes. Three triage experts, a certified emergency nurse, a KTAS provider and instructor, and a nurse recommended based on excellent emergency department experience and competence determined the true KTAS. Triage accuracy was evaluated by inter-rater agreement between the expert and emergency nurse KTAS scores. The comments of the experts were analyzed to evaluate the cause of triage error. An independent sample t-test was conducted to compare the number of patient visits per hour in terms of the accuracy and inaccuracy of triage.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability between the emergency nurse and the true KTAS score was weighted kappa = .83 and Pearson's r = .88 (p < .001). Of 1267 records, 186 (14.7%) showed some disagreement (under triage = 131, over triage = 55). Causes of mistriage included: error applying the numerical rating scale (n = 64) and misjudgment of the physical symptoms associated with the chief complaint (n = 47). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of patient visits per hour for accurate and inaccurate triage (t = -0.77, p = .442).

CONCLUSION

There was highly agreement between the KTAS scores determined by emergency nurses and those determined by experts. The main cause of mistriage was misapplication of the pain scale to the KTAS algorithm.

摘要

目的

使用韩国分诊和 acuity 量表(KTAS)确定急诊科分诊准确性,并评估分诊错误的原因。

方法

这是一项基于 2016 年 10 月至 2017 年 9 月期间在两家急诊科收治的 1267 例成年患者的系统选择记录的横断面回顾性研究。评估了 24 个变量,包括主要症状、根据初始护理记录的生命体征以及临床结局。三名分诊专家、一名认证急诊护士、一名 KTAS 提供者和讲师,以及根据出色的急诊部门经验和能力推荐的护士,根据初始护理记录确定了真正的 KTAS。通过专家和急诊护士 KTAS 评分之间的评分者间一致性评估分诊准确性。分析专家的意见以评估分诊错误的原因。独立样本 t 检验用于比较分诊准确和不准确的情况下每小时就诊人数。

结果

急诊护士与真正 KTAS 评分之间的评分者间可靠性加权 kappa =.83,Pearson's r =.88(p <.001)。在 1267 份记录中,有 186 份(14.7%)存在一些分歧(分诊低 = 131 例,分诊高 = 55 例)。分诊错误的原因包括:数字评分量表应用错误(n = 64)和对主要症状相关的身体症状判断错误(n = 47)。准确和不准确分诊的每小时就诊人数没有统计学差异(t = -0.77,p =.442)。

结论

急诊护士确定的 KTAS 评分与专家确定的评分高度一致。分诊错误的主要原因是疼痛量表在 KTAS 算法中的错误应用。

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