Cargando…

The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study

INTRODUCTION: Triage systems with limited room for clinical judgment are used by emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm (CTA) is a simplified triage system with a clinical assessment. METHODS: The trial was a non-inferiority, two-center cluster-randomized crossover st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hasselbalch, Rasmus Bo, Pries-Heje, Mia, Schultz, Martin, Plesner, Louis Lind, Ravn, Lisbet, Lind, Morten, Greibe, Rasmus, Jensen, Birgitte Nybo, Høi-Hansen, Thomas, Carlson, Nicholas, Torp-Pedersen, Christian, Rasmussen, Lars S., Iversen, Kasper
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6361446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30716123
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211769
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Triage systems with limited room for clinical judgment are used by emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm (CTA) is a simplified triage system with a clinical assessment. METHODS: The trial was a non-inferiority, two-center cluster-randomized crossover study where CTA was compared to a local adaptation of Adaptive Process Triage (ADAPT). CTA involves initial categorization based on vital signs with a final modification based on clinical assessment by an ED nurse. We used 30-day mortality with a non-inferiority margin at 0.5%. Predictive performance was compared using Receiver Operator Characteristics. RESULTS: We included 45,347 patient visits, 23,158 (51%) and 22,189 (49%) were triaged with CTA and ADAPT respectively with a 30-day mortality of 3.42% and 3.43% (P = 0.996) a difference of 0.01% (95% CI: -0.34 to 0.33), which met the non-inferiority criteria. Mortality at 48 hours was 0.62% vs. 0.71%, (P = 0.26) and 6.38% vs. 6.61%, (P = 0.32) at 90 days for CTA and ADAPT. CTA triaged at significantly lower urgency level (P<0.001) and was superior in predicting 30-day mortality, Area under the curve: 0.67 (95% CI 0.65–0.69) compared to 0.64 for ADAPT (95% CI 0.62–0.66) (P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in rate of admission to the intensive care unit, length of stay, waiting time nor rate of readmission within 30 or 90 days. CONCLUSION: A novel triage system based on vital signs and a clinical assessment by an ED nurse was non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm by short term mortality, and superior in predicting 30-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02698319