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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |
_version_ | 1783392687277211648 |
---|---|
author | 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 |
author_facet | 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 |
author_sort | Hasselbalch, Rasmus Bo |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6361446 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63614462019-02-15 The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study 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 PLoS One Research Article 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 Public Library of Science 2019-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6361446/ /pubmed/30716123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211769 Text en © 2019 Hasselbalch et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article 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 The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title | The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title_full | The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title_fullStr | The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title_full_unstemmed | The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title_short | The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study |
title_sort | copenhagen triage algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: a cluster-randomized study |
topic | Research Article |
url | 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 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hasselbalchrasmusbo thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT prieshejemia thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT schultzmartin thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT plesnerlouislind thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT ravnlisbet thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT lindmorten thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT greiberasmus thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT jensenbirgittenybo thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT høihansenthomas thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT carlsonnicholas thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT torppedersenchristian thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT rasmussenlarss thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT iversenkasper thecopenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT hasselbalchrasmusbo copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT prieshejemia copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT schultzmartin copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT plesnerlouislind copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT ravnlisbet copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT lindmorten copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT greiberasmus copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT jensenbirgittenybo copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT høihansenthomas copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT carlsonnicholas copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT torppedersenchristian copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT rasmussenlarss copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy AT iversenkasper copenhagentriagealgorithmisnoninferiortoatraditionaltriagealgorithmaclusterrandomizedstudy |