肿瘤患者的分诊决定和健康结果:急诊科内科和外科癌症病例的比较研究。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Anas Alsharawneh, Rami A Elshatarat, Ghaida Shujayyi Alsulami, Mahmoud H Alrabab'a, Majed S Al-Za'areer, Bandar Naffaa Alhumaidi, Wesam T Almagharbeh, Tahany Fareed Al Niarat, Khaled M Al-Sayaghi, Zyad T Saleh
{"title":"肿瘤患者的分诊决定和健康结果:急诊科内科和外科癌症病例的比较研究。","authors":"Anas Alsharawneh, Rami A Elshatarat, Ghaida Shujayyi Alsulami, Mahmoud H Alrabab'a, Majed S Al-Za'areer, Bandar Naffaa Alhumaidi, Wesam T Almagharbeh, Tahany Fareed Al Niarat, Khaled M Al-Sayaghi, Zyad T Saleh","doi":"10.1186/s12873-025-01191-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer-related emergencies are a significant challenge for healthcare systems globally, including Jordan. Effective triage is critical in ensuring timely and accurate prioritization of care, especially for surgical cancer patients requiring urgent intervention. However, under-triage-misclassification of high-acuity patients into lower urgency categories-can lead to significant delays and worsened outcomes. Despite the recognized importance of accurate triage, limited research has evaluated its impact on cancer patients in Jordan, particularly those requiring surgical care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the timeliness and prioritization of care for cancer patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) in Jordan. The specific objectives were to examine the association between under-triage and treatment delays and assess its impact on key outcomes, including time to physician assessment, time to treatment, and hospital length of stay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort design was used to analyze data from 481 cancer patients admitted through the ED in four governmental hospitals across Jordan. Two cohorts were established: surgical cancer patients requiring emergency interventions and non-surgical cancer patients presenting with other oncological emergencies. Triage accuracy was assessed using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), and under-triage was identified when patients requiring high urgency care (CTAS I-III) were misclassified into lower urgency categories (CTAS IV-V). Data were collected from electronic health records and analyzed using multiple linear regression to evaluate the association between under-triage and treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of patients were elderly, with a mean age of 62.6 years (± 10.7), and a significant proportion presented with advanced-stage cancer (83.4% in stages III and IV). Surgical patients frequently exhibited severe symptoms such as acute pain (51.6%) and respiratory discomfort (41.1%). Under-triage rates were 44.1% for surgical patients and 39.4% for non-surgical patients. Among surgical patients, under-triage significantly delayed time to physician assessment (β = 34.9 min, p < 0.001) and time to treatment (β = 68.0 min, p < 0.001). For non-surgical patients, under-triage delays were even greater, with prolonged physician assessment times (β = 48.6 min, p < 0.001) and ED length of stay (β = 7.3 h, p < 0.001). Both cohorts experienced significant increases in hospital length of stay (surgical: β = 3.2 days, p = 0.008; non-surgical: β = 3.2 days, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Under-triage in Jordanian EDs is strongly associated with significant delays in care for both surgical and non-surgical cancer patients, highlighting systemic gaps in acuity recognition and triage processes. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to improve triage accuracy, particularly through oncology-specific training and the integration of evidence-based tools like SIRS criteria. Enhancing ED processes for cancer patients is crucial to reducing delays, optimizing resource allocation, and improving clinical outcomes in this vulnerable population.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":"25 1","pages":"69"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12010577/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Triage decisions and health outcomes among oncology patients: a comparative study of medical and surgical cancer cases in emergency departments.\",\"authors\":\"Anas Alsharawneh, Rami A Elshatarat, Ghaida Shujayyi Alsulami, Mahmoud H Alrabab'a, Majed S Al-Za'areer, Bandar Naffaa Alhumaidi, Wesam T Almagharbeh, Tahany Fareed Al Niarat, Khaled M Al-Sayaghi, Zyad T Saleh\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12873-025-01191-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer-related emergencies are a significant challenge for healthcare systems globally, including Jordan. Effective triage is critical in ensuring timely and accurate prioritization of care, especially for surgical cancer patients requiring urgent intervention. However, under-triage-misclassification of high-acuity patients into lower urgency categories-can lead to significant delays and worsened outcomes. Despite the recognized importance of accurate triage, limited research has evaluated its impact on cancer patients in Jordan, particularly those requiring surgical care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the timeliness and prioritization of care for cancer patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) in Jordan. The specific objectives were to examine the association between under-triage and treatment delays and assess its impact on key outcomes, including time to physician assessment, time to treatment, and hospital length of stay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort design was used to analyze data from 481 cancer patients admitted through the ED in four governmental hospitals across Jordan. Two cohorts were established: surgical cancer patients requiring emergency interventions and non-surgical cancer patients presenting with other oncological emergencies. Triage accuracy was assessed using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), and under-triage was identified when patients requiring high urgency care (CTAS I-III) were misclassified into lower urgency categories (CTAS IV-V). Data were collected from electronic health records and analyzed using multiple linear regression to evaluate the association between under-triage and treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of patients were elderly, with a mean age of 62.6 years (± 10.7), and a significant proportion presented with advanced-stage cancer (83.4% in stages III and IV). Surgical patients frequently exhibited severe symptoms such as acute pain (51.6%) and respiratory discomfort (41.1%). Under-triage rates were 44.1% for surgical patients and 39.4% for non-surgical patients. Among surgical patients, under-triage significantly delayed time to physician assessment (β = 34.9 min, p < 0.001) and time to treatment (β = 68.0 min, p < 0.001). For non-surgical patients, under-triage delays were even greater, with prolonged physician assessment times (β = 48.6 min, p < 0.001) and ED length of stay (β = 7.3 h, p < 0.001). Both cohorts experienced significant increases in hospital length of stay (surgical: β = 3.2 days, p = 0.008; non-surgical: β = 3.2 days, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Under-triage in Jordanian EDs is strongly associated with significant delays in care for both surgical and non-surgical cancer patients, highlighting systemic gaps in acuity recognition and triage processes. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to improve triage accuracy, particularly through oncology-specific training and the integration of evidence-based tools like SIRS criteria. Enhancing ED processes for cancer patients is crucial to reducing delays, optimizing resource allocation, and improving clinical outcomes in this vulnerable population.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"69\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12010577/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-025-01191-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-025-01191-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:癌症相关紧急情况是包括约旦在内的全球卫生保健系统面临的重大挑战。有效的分诊对于确保及时和准确地优先护理至关重要,特别是对于需要紧急干预的外科癌症患者。然而,不合理的分类-将高敏度患者错误地分类为较低的紧急类别-可能导致严重的延误和恶化的结果。尽管人们认识到准确分诊的重要性,但有限的研究评估了它对约旦癌症患者的影响,特别是那些需要手术治疗的癌症患者。目的:本研究旨在评估约旦急诊科(ED)收治的癌症患者护理的及时性和优先级。具体目标是检查分类不足和治疗延误之间的关系,并评估其对关键结果的影响,包括到医生评估的时间、治疗时间和住院时间。方法:采用回顾性队列设计,分析约旦四所政府医院急诊室收治的481例癌症患者的数据。建立了两个队列:需要紧急干预的外科癌症患者和出现其他肿瘤紧急情况的非手术癌症患者。使用加拿大分诊和敏锐度量表(CTAS)评估分诊准确性,当需要高紧急护理(CTAS I-III)的患者被错误分类为低紧急类别(CTAS IV-V)时,确定分诊不足。从电子健康记录中收集数据,并使用多元线性回归分析,以评估分类不足与治疗结果之间的关系。结果:患者以老年人为主,平均年龄为62.6岁(±10.7岁),晚期癌症占显著比例(ⅲ期和ⅳ期为83.4%)。手术患者常出现严重症状,如急性疼痛(51.6%)和呼吸不适(41.1%)。手术患者分类不足率为44.1%,非手术患者为39.4%。结论:约旦急诊科分诊不足与外科和非手术癌症患者的护理延误密切相关,突出了视力识别和分诊过程的系统性差距。这些发现强调需要有针对性的干预措施来提高分诊准确性,特别是通过肿瘤特异性培训和基于证据的工具(如SIRS标准)的整合。加强对癌症患者的ED治疗对于减少延误、优化资源分配和改善这一弱势群体的临床结果至关重要。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Triage decisions and health outcomes among oncology patients: a comparative study of medical and surgical cancer cases in emergency departments.

Background: Cancer-related emergencies are a significant challenge for healthcare systems globally, including Jordan. Effective triage is critical in ensuring timely and accurate prioritization of care, especially for surgical cancer patients requiring urgent intervention. However, under-triage-misclassification of high-acuity patients into lower urgency categories-can lead to significant delays and worsened outcomes. Despite the recognized importance of accurate triage, limited research has evaluated its impact on cancer patients in Jordan, particularly those requiring surgical care.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the timeliness and prioritization of care for cancer patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) in Jordan. The specific objectives were to examine the association between under-triage and treatment delays and assess its impact on key outcomes, including time to physician assessment, time to treatment, and hospital length of stay.

Methods: A retrospective cohort design was used to analyze data from 481 cancer patients admitted through the ED in four governmental hospitals across Jordan. Two cohorts were established: surgical cancer patients requiring emergency interventions and non-surgical cancer patients presenting with other oncological emergencies. Triage accuracy was assessed using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), and under-triage was identified when patients requiring high urgency care (CTAS I-III) were misclassified into lower urgency categories (CTAS IV-V). Data were collected from electronic health records and analyzed using multiple linear regression to evaluate the association between under-triage and treatment outcomes.

Results: The majority of patients were elderly, with a mean age of 62.6 years (± 10.7), and a significant proportion presented with advanced-stage cancer (83.4% in stages III and IV). Surgical patients frequently exhibited severe symptoms such as acute pain (51.6%) and respiratory discomfort (41.1%). Under-triage rates were 44.1% for surgical patients and 39.4% for non-surgical patients. Among surgical patients, under-triage significantly delayed time to physician assessment (β = 34.9 min, p < 0.001) and time to treatment (β = 68.0 min, p < 0.001). For non-surgical patients, under-triage delays were even greater, with prolonged physician assessment times (β = 48.6 min, p < 0.001) and ED length of stay (β = 7.3 h, p < 0.001). Both cohorts experienced significant increases in hospital length of stay (surgical: β = 3.2 days, p = 0.008; non-surgical: β = 3.2 days, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Under-triage in Jordanian EDs is strongly associated with significant delays in care for both surgical and non-surgical cancer patients, highlighting systemic gaps in acuity recognition and triage processes. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to improve triage accuracy, particularly through oncology-specific training and the integration of evidence-based tools like SIRS criteria. Enhancing ED processes for cancer patients is crucial to reducing delays, optimizing resource allocation, and improving clinical outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
×
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