Do emergency medicine health care workers rate triage level of chest pain differently based upon appearance in simulated patients?

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
European Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-13 DOI:10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001113
Fabien Coisy, Guillaume Olivier, François-Xavier Ageron, Hugo Guillermou, Mélanie Roussel, Frédéric Balen, Laura Grau-Mercier, Xavier Bobbia
{"title":"Do emergency medicine health care workers rate triage level of chest pain differently based upon appearance in simulated patients?","authors":"Fabien Coisy, Guillaume Olivier, François-Xavier Ageron, Hugo Guillermou, Mélanie Roussel, Frédéric Balen, Laura Grau-Mercier, Xavier Bobbia","doi":"10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and importance: </strong>There seems to be evidence of gender and ethnic bias in the early management of acute coronary syndrome. However, whether these differences are related to less severe severity assessment or to less intensive management despite the same severity assessment has not yet been established.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To show whether viewing an image with characters of different gender appearance or ethnic background changes the prioritization decision in the emergency triage area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The responders were offered a standardized clinical case in an emergency triage area. The associated image was randomized among eight standardized images of people presenting with chest pain and differing in gender and ethnic appearance (White, Black, North African and southeast Asian appearance).</p><p><strong>Outcome measures and analysis: </strong>Each person was asked to respond to a single clinical case, in which the priority level [from 1 (requiring immediate treatment) to 5 (able to wait up to 2 h)] was assessed visually. Priority classes 1 and 2 for vital emergencies and classes 3-5 for nonvital emergencies were grouped together for analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 1563 respondents [mean age, 36 ± 10 years; 867 (55%) women], 777 (50%) were emergency physicians, 180 (11%) emergency medicine residents and 606 (39%) nurses. The priority levels for all responses were 1-5 : 180 (11%), 686 (44%), 539 (34%), 131 (9%) and 27 (2%). There was a higher reported priority in male compared to female [62% vs. 49%, difference 13% (95% confidence interval; CI 8-18%)]. Compared to White people, there was a lower reported priority for Black simulated patients [47% vs. 58%, difference -11% (95% CI -18% to -4%)] but not people of southeast Asian [55% vs. 58%, difference -3% (95% CI -10-5%)] and North African [61% vs. 58%, difference 3% (95% CI -4-10%)] appearance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, the visualization of simulated patients with different characteristics modified the prioritization decision. Compared to White patients, Black patients were less likely to receive emergency treatment. The same was true for women compared with men.</p>","PeriodicalId":11893,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001113","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and importance: There seems to be evidence of gender and ethnic bias in the early management of acute coronary syndrome. However, whether these differences are related to less severe severity assessment or to less intensive management despite the same severity assessment has not yet been established.

Objective: To show whether viewing an image with characters of different gender appearance or ethnic background changes the prioritization decision in the emergency triage area.

Methods: The responders were offered a standardized clinical case in an emergency triage area. The associated image was randomized among eight standardized images of people presenting with chest pain and differing in gender and ethnic appearance (White, Black, North African and southeast Asian appearance).

Outcome measures and analysis: Each person was asked to respond to a single clinical case, in which the priority level [from 1 (requiring immediate treatment) to 5 (able to wait up to 2 h)] was assessed visually. Priority classes 1 and 2 for vital emergencies and classes 3-5 for nonvital emergencies were grouped together for analysis.

Results: Among the 1563 respondents [mean age, 36 ± 10 years; 867 (55%) women], 777 (50%) were emergency physicians, 180 (11%) emergency medicine residents and 606 (39%) nurses. The priority levels for all responses were 1-5 : 180 (11%), 686 (44%), 539 (34%), 131 (9%) and 27 (2%). There was a higher reported priority in male compared to female [62% vs. 49%, difference 13% (95% confidence interval; CI 8-18%)]. Compared to White people, there was a lower reported priority for Black simulated patients [47% vs. 58%, difference -11% (95% CI -18% to -4%)] but not people of southeast Asian [55% vs. 58%, difference -3% (95% CI -10-5%)] and North African [61% vs. 58%, difference 3% (95% CI -4-10%)] appearance.

Conclusion: In this study, the visualization of simulated patients with different characteristics modified the prioritization decision. Compared to White patients, Black patients were less likely to receive emergency treatment. The same was true for women compared with men.

急诊科医护人员是否会根据模拟患者的外观对胸痛的分诊级别做出不同的评价?
背景和重要性:似乎有证据表明,在急性冠状动脉综合征的早期管理中存在性别和种族偏见。然而,这些差异是与较轻的严重程度评估有关,还是与尽管严重程度评估相同但却较少强化管理有关,目前尚未确定:目的:显示在急诊分诊区观看不同性别外观或种族背景的图像是否会改变优先级决定:方法:在急诊分诊区为接诊者提供一个标准化的临床病例。结果测量和分析:每个人都被要求对一个临床病例做出反应,其中的优先级别[从 1(需要立即治疗)到 5(可等待 2 小时)]是通过视觉评估的。重要紧急情况的优先级别为 1 级和 2 级,非重要紧急情况的优先级别为 3 级和 5 级:在 1563 名受访者(平均年龄为 36 ± 10 岁;867 人(55%)为女性)中,777 人(50%)为急诊科医生,180 人(11%)为急诊科住院医生,606 人(39%)为护士。所有答复的优先级别为 1-5 级:180人(11%)、686人(44%)、539人(34%)、131人(9%)和27人(2%)。与女性相比,男性报告的优先级更高[62% 对 49%,相差 13%(95% 置信区间;CI 8-18%)]。与白人相比,黑人模拟病人的优先级较低[47% vs. 58%,差异-11% (95% CI -18% to -4%)],但东南亚人[55% vs. 58%,差异-3% (95% CI -10-5%)]和北非人[61% vs. 58%,差异3% (95% CI -4-10%)]的优先级较低:在这项研究中,不同特征的模拟患者的可视化改变了优先排序决定。与白人患者相比,黑人患者接受紧急治疗的可能性较低。女性与男性相比也是如此。
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
3.60
自引率
27.30%
发文量
180
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Emergency Medicine is the official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine. It is devoted to serving the European emergency medicine community and to promoting European standards of training, diagnosis and care in this rapidly growing field. Published bimonthly, the Journal offers original papers on all aspects of acute injury and sudden illness, including: emergency medicine, anaesthesiology, cardiology, disaster medicine, intensive care, internal medicine, orthopaedics, paediatrics, toxicology and trauma care. It addresses issues on the organization of emergency services in hospitals and in the community and examines postgraduate training from European and global perspectives. The Journal also publishes papers focusing on the different models of emergency healthcare delivery in Europe and beyond. With a multidisciplinary approach, the European Journal of Emergency Medicine publishes scientific research, topical reviews, news of meetings and events of interest to the emergency medicine community. Submitted articles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool. ​
×
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