Table 5.
Studies on how the assessment of the urgency of need to see a physician according to different triage systems could predict hospital mortality.
| Author Year, reference Country | Triage system | Patient characteristics: Age Gender | Outcome | Results (Mortality frequency per triage level) | Remarks | Study quality and relevance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dong SL et al 2007, [43] Canada |
ECTAS | 29 346 patients 47 years 48% female |
Mortality in ED | Triage level: 1: 22% 2: 0.22% 3: 0.031% 4: 0.018% 5: 0% OR 664 (357-1233), 1 vs 2-5 |
- Low number of fatalities (70 cases) | Moderate |
| Dent A et al 1999, [35] |
ATS | 42 778 patients Age & sex not given |
In-hospital mortality | Triage level: 1: 16% 2: 5% 3: 2% 4: 1% 5: 0.1% p < 0.0001 |
Moderate | |
| Widgren BR et al 2008, [10] Sweden |
METTS | 8 695 patients 65 years 45% female |
In-hospital mortality | Triage level: 1: 14% 2: 6% 3: 3% 4: 3% 5: 0.5% p < 0.001 |
- Only patients admitted to hospital evaluated | Moderate |
| Doherty SR et al 2003, [36] |
ATS | 84 802 patients Age & sex not given |
24 hours mortality | Triage level: 1: 12% 2: 2.1% 3: 1.0% 4. 0.3% 5: 0.03% p < 0.001 |
- Consecutive patients | Moderate |
Mortality figures (%) are shown for each triage level for patients admitted to a hospital emergency department.
CTAS = Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale; ATS = Australian Triage Scale; METTS = Medical Emergency Triage and Treatment System