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。
Pediatric early warning score versus a paediatric triage tool in the emergency department: A reliability study.
作者信息
Branes Hanne, Solevåg Anne Lee, Solberg Marianne Trygg
机构信息
Lovisenberg Deaconal University College, Oslo, Norway.
The Department of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
出版信息
Nurs Open. 2021 Mar;8(2):702-708. doi: 10.1002/nop2.675. Epub 2020 Nov 11.
AIM
In the paediatric emergency department (PED), it is important to correctly prioritize children for physician assessment. The pediatric early warning score (PEWS), although not a triage tool, is often used for PED triage. The scandinavian Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-pediatric (RETTS-p) is a reliability tested triage tool. We aimed to compare PEWS and RETTS-p in a Norwegian PED.
DESIGN
A reliability study.
METHODS
The PED nurse routinely did PEWS observations, while the principal investigator concomitantly made RETTS-p observations. Inter-tool agreement was calculated for the complete PEWS and RETTS-p and for vital signs scores, disregarding the RETTS-p emergency symptoms and signs (ESS).
RESULTS
Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-pediatric assigned a higher urgency than PEWS. The inter-tool agreement between PEWS and RETTS-p was low (weighted kappa [95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32 [0.24-0.40]]). Weighted kappa (95% CI) was 0.50 (0.41-0.59) for PEWS and RETTS-p without ESS, indicating that PEWS is not equivalent to five-level triage tools.
目的
在儿科急诊科（PED），正确对儿童进行医生评估的优先级划分很重要。儿科早期预警评分（PEWS）虽不是分诊工具，但常用于PED分诊。斯堪的纳维亚快速急诊分诊与治疗系统 - 儿科版（RETTS - p）是一种经过可靠性测试的分诊工具。我们旨在比较挪威PED中PEWS和RETTS - p的情况。
设计
一项可靠性研究。
方法
PED护士常规进行PEWS观察，同时主要研究者同步进行RETTS - p观察。计算完整的PEWS和RETTS - p以及生命体征评分的工具间一致性，不考虑RETTS - p的紧急症状和体征（ESS）。
结果
斯堪的纳维亚快速急诊分诊与治疗系统 - 儿科版分配的紧急程度高于PEWS。PEWS和RETTS - p之间的工具间一致性较低（加权kappa[95%置信区间[CI]=0.32[0.24 - 0.40]]）。不考虑ESS时，PEWS和RETTS - p的加权kappa（95%CI）为0.50（0.41 - 0.59），表明PEWS不等同于五级分诊工具。
Zotero 插件