Low compliance with a validated system for emergency department triage.

Danish medical bulletin Pub Date : 2011-06-01
Dorthea Christensen, Nanna Martin Jensen, Rikke Maaløe, Søren Steemann Rudolph, Bo Belhage, Hans Perrild
{"title":"Low compliance with a validated system for emergency department triage.","authors":"Dorthea Christensen,&nbsp;Nanna Martin Jensen,&nbsp;Rikke Maaløe,&nbsp;Søren Steemann Rudolph,&nbsp;Bo Belhage,&nbsp;Hans Perrild","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Bispebjerg Hospital has introduced a triage system at the Emergency Department (ED) based on \"primary criteria\" and a physiological scoring system named the Bispebjerg Early Warning Score (BEWS). A BEWS is calculated on the basis of five vital signs which are accessible bedside. Patients who have a \"primary criterion\" or a BEWS ≥ 5 are presumed to be critically ill or severely injured and should be received by a multidisciplinary team, termed the Emergency Call (EC) and Trauma Call (TC), respectively. The aim of this study was to examine compliance with this triage system at Bispebjerg Hospital.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Retrospective evaluation of the triage of a random sample of 300 ED patients. ED medical charts were searched for \"primary criteria\", documentation of vital signs and a BEWS score. If a BEWS score had not been calculated, this was done retrospectively by the author. An evaluation was made to determine whether ECs or TCs had been correctly activated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 47 patients, all five vital signs for calculation of a BEWS had been documented. A BEWS had been calculated in 22 patients. Nine patients had a TC activation criterion, and in all these cases a TC was activated. A total of 48 patients had an EC activation criterion, but an EC had only been activated in 24 patients. Among the 24 patients for whom an EC had not been activated, eight had a \"primary criterion\" and 16 patients had a retrospective BEWS ≥ 5.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The triage system is not being used systematically and documentation of vital signs is insufficient at Bispebjerg Hospital. As a consequence, many patients who are presumed to be critically ill are not allocated to an EC. Initiatives have been taken to raise compliance with the system.</p>","PeriodicalId":11019,"journal":{"name":"Danish medical bulletin","volume":"58 6","pages":"A4294"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Danish medical bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Bispebjerg Hospital has introduced a triage system at the Emergency Department (ED) based on "primary criteria" and a physiological scoring system named the Bispebjerg Early Warning Score (BEWS). A BEWS is calculated on the basis of five vital signs which are accessible bedside. Patients who have a "primary criterion" or a BEWS ≥ 5 are presumed to be critically ill or severely injured and should be received by a multidisciplinary team, termed the Emergency Call (EC) and Trauma Call (TC), respectively. The aim of this study was to examine compliance with this triage system at Bispebjerg Hospital.

Material and methods: Retrospective evaluation of the triage of a random sample of 300 ED patients. ED medical charts were searched for "primary criteria", documentation of vital signs and a BEWS score. If a BEWS score had not been calculated, this was done retrospectively by the author. An evaluation was made to determine whether ECs or TCs had been correctly activated.

Results: In 47 patients, all five vital signs for calculation of a BEWS had been documented. A BEWS had been calculated in 22 patients. Nine patients had a TC activation criterion, and in all these cases a TC was activated. A total of 48 patients had an EC activation criterion, but an EC had only been activated in 24 patients. Among the 24 patients for whom an EC had not been activated, eight had a "primary criterion" and 16 patients had a retrospective BEWS ≥ 5.

Conclusion: The triage system is not being used systematically and documentation of vital signs is insufficient at Bispebjerg Hospital. As a consequence, many patients who are presumed to be critically ill are not allocated to an EC. Initiatives have been taken to raise compliance with the system.

对经过验证的急诊科分诊系统的依从性较低。
简介:Bispebjerg医院在急诊科(ED)引入了一个基于“主要标准”的分诊系统和一个名为Bispebjerg早期预警评分(BEWS)的生理评分系统。BEWS是根据床边可获得的五个生命体征来计算的。具有“主要标准”或BEWS≥5的患者被推定为危重或严重受伤,应由多学科小组接收,分别称为紧急呼叫(EC)和创伤呼叫(TC)。本研究的目的是检查Bispebjerg医院对这种分诊系统的依从性。材料与方法:对随机抽取的300例急症患者的分诊方法进行回顾性评价。在急诊科病历中搜索“主要标准”、生命体征记录和BEWS评分。如果没有计算BEWS评分,则由作者进行回顾性分析。进行评估以确定ECs或TCs是否被正确激活。结果:在47例患者中,计算BEWS的所有5个生命体征均已记录。计算了22例患者的BEWS。9例患者有TC激活标准,在所有这些病例中,TC都被激活。共有48例患者有EC激活标准,但只有24例患者EC被激活。在未激活EC的24例患者中,8例患者具有“主要标准”,16例患者的回顾性BEWS≥5。结论:比斯贝尔格医院分诊系统未得到系统应用,生命体征记录不足。因此,许多被认为是重症的病人没有被分配到急诊病房。已采取主动行动提高对该制度的遵守。
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
Danish medical bulletin
Danish medical bulletin 医学-医学:内科
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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