Triage Accuracy in Pediatrics Using the Emergency Severity Index

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Warren D. Frankenberger PhD, RN, Joseph J. Zorc MD, MSCE, Elizabeth D. Ten Have BA, MLIS, Darcy Brodecki BS, Walter G. Faig PhD
{"title":"Triage Accuracy in Pediatrics Using the Emergency Severity Index","authors":"Warren D. Frankenberger PhD, RN,&nbsp;Joseph J. Zorc MD, MSCE,&nbsp;Elizabeth D. Ten Have BA, MLIS,&nbsp;Darcy Brodecki BS,&nbsp;Walter G. Faig PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jen.2023.11.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Although the Emergency Severity Index is the most widely used tool in the United States to prioritize care for patients who seek emergency care, including children, there are significant deficiencies in the tool’s performance. Inaccurate triage has been associated with delayed treatment, unnecessary diagnostic testing, and bias in clinical care. We evaluated the accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index to stratify patient priority based on predicted resource utilization in pediatric emergency department patients and identified covariates influencing performance.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional, retrospective study used a data platform that links clinical and research data sets from a single freestanding pediatric hospital in the United States. Chi-square analysis was used to describes rates of over- and undertriage. Mixed effects ordinal logistic regression identified associations between Emergency Severity Index categories assigned at triage and key emergency department resources using discrete data elements and natural language processing of text notes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We analyzed 304,422 emergency department visits by 153,984 unique individuals in the final analysis; 80% of visits were triaged as lower acuity Emergency Severity Index levels 3 to 5, with the most common level being Emergency Severity Index 4 (43%). Emergency department visits scored Emergency Severity Index levels 3 and 4 were triaged accurately 46% and 38%, respectively. We noted racial differences in overall triage accuracy.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Although the plurality of patients was scored as Emergency Severity Index 4, 50% were mistriaged, and there were disparities based on race indicating Emergency Severity Index mistriages pediatric patients. Further study is needed to elucidate the application of the Emergency Severity Indices in pediatrics using a multicenter emergency department population with diverse clinical and demographic characteristics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51082,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099176723003136/pdfft?md5=deab00399cdf45e9436b26ce3aa2b5a6&pid=1-s2.0-S0099176723003136-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099176723003136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Although the Emergency Severity Index is the most widely used tool in the United States to prioritize care for patients who seek emergency care, including children, there are significant deficiencies in the tool’s performance. Inaccurate triage has been associated with delayed treatment, unnecessary diagnostic testing, and bias in clinical care. We evaluated the accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index to stratify patient priority based on predicted resource utilization in pediatric emergency department patients and identified covariates influencing performance.

Methods

This cross-sectional, retrospective study used a data platform that links clinical and research data sets from a single freestanding pediatric hospital in the United States. Chi-square analysis was used to describes rates of over- and undertriage. Mixed effects ordinal logistic regression identified associations between Emergency Severity Index categories assigned at triage and key emergency department resources using discrete data elements and natural language processing of text notes.

Results

We analyzed 304,422 emergency department visits by 153,984 unique individuals in the final analysis; 80% of visits were triaged as lower acuity Emergency Severity Index levels 3 to 5, with the most common level being Emergency Severity Index 4 (43%). Emergency department visits scored Emergency Severity Index levels 3 and 4 were triaged accurately 46% and 38%, respectively. We noted racial differences in overall triage accuracy.

Discussion

Although the plurality of patients was scored as Emergency Severity Index 4, 50% were mistriaged, and there were disparities based on race indicating Emergency Severity Index mistriages pediatric patients. Further study is needed to elucidate the application of the Emergency Severity Indices in pediatrics using a multicenter emergency department population with diverse clinical and demographic characteristics.

使用紧急情况严重程度指数进行儿科分诊的准确性
导言尽管急诊严重程度指数是美国最广泛使用的工具,用于确定包括儿童在内的急诊患者的护理优先次序,但该工具的性能存在重大缺陷。不准确的分诊与延误治疗、不必要的诊断检测和临床护理中的偏差有关。我们评估了急诊严重程度指数的准确性,该指数可根据儿科急诊患者的预测资源利用率对患者的优先级进行分层,并确定了影响其性能的协变量。这项横断面回顾性研究使用了一个数据平台,该平台将美国一家独立儿科医院的临床和研究数据集连接起来。采用卡方分析法描述了过度和不足率。混合效应序数逻辑回归利用离散数据元素和文本记录的自然语言处理,确定了分诊时分配的急诊严重程度指数类别与急诊科关键资源之间的关联。结果我们在最终分析中分析了153984名独特个体的304422次急诊就诊;80%的就诊被分诊为急诊严重程度指数3至5级,最常见的级别是急诊严重程度指数4(43%)。急诊严重程度指数 3 级和 4 级的准确分诊率分别为 46% 和 38%。我们注意到在总体分诊准确性方面存在种族差异。讨论虽然大多数患者的急诊严重程度指数为 4,但有 50%的患者被错误分诊,而且急诊严重程度指数错误分诊的儿科患者存在种族差异。还需要进一步研究,利用具有不同临床和人口特征的多中心急诊科人群来阐明急诊严重程度指数在儿科中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
132
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Emergency Nursing, the official journal of the Emergency Nurses Association (ENA), is committed to the dissemination of high quality, peer-reviewed manuscripts relevant to all areas of emergency nursing practice across the lifespan. Journal content includes clinical topics, integrative or systematic literature reviews, research, and practice improvement initiatives that provide emergency nurses globally with implications for translation of new knowledge into practice. The Journal also includes focused sections such as case studies, pharmacology/toxicology, injury prevention, trauma, triage, quality and safety, pediatrics and geriatrics. The Journal aims to mirror the goal of ENA to promote: community, governance and leadership, knowledge, quality and safety, and advocacy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信