Abstract
Introduction:
Triage is one of the most important systems in patients prioritizing at the time of arrival to hospital. Based on the severity of the injury and the need for treatment, this system manages patients in the least time, which could lead to rotation of patients with high reliability and safety. Currently, the most accepted method for triage is emergency severity index (ESI) system, considered as five-level triage method, too. This method were implemented in Al Zahra Hospital of Isfahan by trained nurses since March to May 2010. This study was aimed to evaluate the accuracy of emergency nursing triage using ESI.
Methods:
This prospective cross sectional study was carried out on 601 patients referred to Al-Zahra hospital of Isfahan through May 2010. The patients’ triage level were determined by physicians and nurses separately and the results compared. To define the level of agreement between two groups (inter-rater agreement), the kappa index was evaluated. To specify the association between the time interval of initial triage and patient final status, Chi-Square test was applied using SPSS 18 statistical software.
Results:
There was no significant difference between results of nurses and physicians triage (P<0/0001). The agreement level (kappa index) between two groups was 94% (95% CI: 0.931-0.957). Of 601 patients, 44.1% ones were hospitalized at the emergency department, 52.6% discharged and 3.3% died. The average of time interval between nursing triage and physician visit was 9.55 minutes at the level one triage, 21.64 minutes at level two, 26.03 minutes at level three, 26.93 minutes at level four, and 11.70 minutes at level five.
Conclusion:
It seems that there is an acceptable inter-rater agreement between emergency nurses and physicians regarding patients’ triage in terms of ESI system.
Key Words: Triage, nurses, physician-nurse relations, emergency medicine
Introduction:
The rate of emergency department (ED) visits is increasing and need for accurate and reliable tools is inevitable for classification of patients based on severity of emergency (1-5). Various methods have been designed for this purpose such as Traffic director, Manchester system, Canadian system, spot –check, and comprehensive triage (6-11). Through these methods, a five-level severity index or emergency severity index (ESI) recognized as a valid and accurate system which is not only prioritize patients, but also follow their treatment process for better access to medical facilities and services (12, 13). In comparison with the three-level triage, this system has higher validity and reliability, and successfulness in use of financial, human and time resources (14, 15). ESI first was designed in United States of America in 1990 and now has been recognized as the gold standard of triage in many countries, such as Australia, Canada, and United Kingdom (1, 12, 16-20). Because of simplicity, ease of learning, operational and conceptual approach, this triage method seems to be the most appropriate system for our country (Iran), too. Since the knowledge and experience of nurses are very important in accurate triage, several studies examined the role of their knowledge and awareness in prioritizing of patients (2, 21). ESI triage system was implemented by trained nurses through May 2010 in Alzahra Hospital of Isfahan. In the present study, the accuracy of ESI triage by emergency nurses was evaluated.
Methods:
Six hundred and one patients referred to the ED of Alzahra hospital, Isfahan, Iran, were triaged based on ESI version four recommendation by physicians and trained nurses during March to April 2008. They triaged patients separately while were unaware to the results of each other. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of Medical University of Isfahan. A checklist was fulfilled for each patients, contained demographic data (age, sex, date, and cause of admission), nurses and physicians triage results, time interval between the initial triage and first visit by physicians, the outcome of the patient, and the time of discharge from the ED. Hospitalization, discharging from ED and mortality was considered as the outcomes. The sample size was calculated considering to p=0.50, d=0.1, and α=0.05 (n=96). All data were analyzed with chi-square and Pearson correlation tests using SPSS version 18 statistical software. P<0.05 was considered as significant. The weighted kappa index (κ) was used for assessment of Inter-rater reliability between the triage of nurse and physician (17).The weighted kappa with 95% confidence interval was reported. Kappa index less than 0.2, 0.2-0.4, 0.6-0.8 and more than 0.8 were considered as week, moderate, good, and excellent, respectively (22, 23).
Results:
There was no significant difference between Nurses and physicians triage. Total calculated weighted Kappa was 94% (95% CI: 0.931-0.957; p<0.0001). Table 1 shows the percentage of agreement between two groups in different levels of triage. Of 601 patients, 316 (52.6%) were discharged from ED, 265 (44.1%) hospitalized, and 20 (3.3%) died (Table 2). The time interval between triage and first physician visit was 0.0 minutes in level one, 12.64±5.0 in level two, 26.03± 9.6 in level three, 62.93±17.3 in level four, and 110.70 ±26.8 in level five (Table 3 ).
Table 1.
The number (%) of agreements between two groups in different levels of emergency severity index (ESI) triage
| ESI level | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 11 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 |
| 2 | 0 | 138 (95) | 3 | 0 | 0 | 141 |
| 3 | 0 | 6 | 404 (98) | 5 | 0 | 415 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 22 (81) | 0 | 24 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 (100) | 10 |
| Total | 11 | 144 | 409 | 27 | 10 | 601 |
ESI: Emergency severity index
Table 2.
Final outcomes of patients with different levels of triage after 24 hours
|
Triage levels
|
Outcome of patients (%)
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitalized | Discharged from ED | Died | |||
| 1 | 3 (27.3) | 2 (18.2) | 6 (54.5) | ||
| 2 | 80 (55.6) | 54 (37.5) | 10 (6.9) | ||
| 3 | 175 (42.8) | 232 (56.7) | 2 (0.5) | ||
| 4 | 5 (18.5) | 20 (74.1) | 2 (7.4) | ||
| 5 | 2 (20) | 8 (80) | 0 (0) | ||
| Total | 265 (44.1) | 316 (52.6) | 20 (3.3) | ||
ED: Emergency department
Table 3.
The average time interval between initial nursing triage and physician examination (minute)
| ESI level | N * (%) | Intervals | Standard ** |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (Resuscitation) | 11 (100) | 0 | 0 |
| 2 (Emergent) | 138 (95) | 12.64±5.0 | 10-15 |
| 3 (Urgent) | 404 (98) | 26.03± 9.6 | 30-60 |
| 4 (Non- Urgent) | 22 (81) | 62.93±17.3 | 60-120 |
| 5 (Referred) | 10 (100) | 110.70 ±26.8 | 120-240 |
Numbers of agreements between two groups,
Maximum time to point of care (based on Manchester triage system)
Discussion:
Our finding revealed that nurses and physicians triage had more than 90% overlap at all levels of triage indicated the high accuracy of nursing triage.
Several studies had been shown the accuracy of nurse triage decision. For example, Goransson et al demonstrated that registered nurses triage had only 58% agreement with the expected acuity rating. But in this study the wide range (22–89%) of accurate triage clearly was a big limitation (24). Abbasi et al., reported low reliability of nursing triage (21). In other hand, the result was in line with Gorason et al., declared the high accuracy of nursing triage (25). The total agreement level of this study was acceptable based on recommendation of Australian college of emergency medicine, determined the kappa of 0.60 as the minimum acceptable agreement level (2). Similar to our investigation Gorason et al. and Worster et al. achieved the moderate (0.46) and good (0.76) agreements, respectively (26, 27).
Based on previous works there were not any significant relation among accuracy of nursing triage and personal characteristics, attitude, and experience level (24, 28). However, nurses’ knowledge has direct relation with appropriate triage of patients (29). It mandates the improvement of staffs’ knowledge regarding the level of patients’ emergency severity; it could be led to minimize the waiting time, enhance the quality of services, and reduce mortalities (30). Training is a key factor in change and improvement of nurses’ knowledge. In this regards, several new training techniques can be used to teach the triage such as gaming technology, web-based training, and etc. (31) which improve the accuracy of the triage process. The prolonged time interval between initial nursing triage and physician examination lead to harmful delays in achieving timely emergency care (32). In contrast, shortening the duration of time between patient presentation and treatment, may increase levels of patient satisfaction and reduced ED overcrowding (33). It could be concluded that trained nurses are able to perform appropriate triage of ED patients and improve the patients’ safety and satisfaction, consequently.
Conclusion:
It seems that there is an acceptable inter-rater agreement between emergency nurses and physicians regarding patients’ triage in terms of ESI system.
Acknowledgments:
The authors appreciate the insightful cooperation of staffs of the Emergency Department of Alzahra Hospital of Isfahan, Iran.
Conflict of interest:
None
Funding support:
None
Authors’ contributions:
All authors passed four criteria for authorship contribution based on recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
References
- 1.Fernandes CM, Tanabe P, Gilboy N, et al. Five-level triage: a report from the ACEP/ENA Five-level Triage Task Force. J Emerg Nurs. 2005;31(1):39–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2004.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Goransson K, Ehrenberg A, Marklund B, Ehnfors M. Accuracy and concordance of nurses in emergency department triage. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(4):432–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2005.00372.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Platts-Mills TF, Travers D, Biese K, et al. Accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index triage instrument for identifying elder emergency department patients receiving an immediate life-saving intervention. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(3):238–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00670.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Shojaee M, Faridaalaee G, Yousefifard M, et al. New scoring system for intra-abdominal injury diagnosis after blunt trauma. Chin J Traumatol. 2014;17(1):19–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Hashemi B, Baratloo A, Rahmati F, et al. Emergency Department Performance Indexes Before and After Establishment of Emergency Medicine. Emergency. 2013;1(1):20–3. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Roukema J, Steyerberg EW, van Meurs A, Ruige M, van der Lei J, Moll HA. Validity of the Manchester Triage System in paediatric emergency care. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(12):906–10. doi: 10.1136/emj.2006.038877. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.van Veen M, Steyerberg EW, Ruige M, et al. Manchester triage system in paediatric emergency care: prospective observational study. BMJ. 2008;337:a1501. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.van Veen M, Steyerberg EW, Van't Klooster M, et al. The Manchester triage system: improvements for paediatric emergency care. Emerg Med J. 2012;29(8):654–9. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2011-200562. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Dallaire C, Poitras J, Aubin K, Lavoie A, Moore L, Audet G. Interrater agreement of Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale scores assigned by base hospital and emergency department nurses. CJEM. 2010;12(1):45–9. doi: 10.1017/s148180350001201x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Fernandes CM, McLeod S, Krause J, et al. Reliability of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale: interrater and intrarater agreement from a community and an academic emergency department. CJEM. 2013;15(4):227–32. doi: 10.2310/8000.2013.130943. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Gravel J, Gouin S, Goldman RD, et al. The Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale for children: a prospective multicenter evaluation. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;60(1):71–7. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.12.004. e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Christ M, Grossmann F, Winter D, Bingisser R, Platz E. Modern triage in the emergency department. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010;107(50):892–8. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0892. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Manos D, Petrie DA, Beveridge RC, Walter S, Ducharme J. Inter-observer agreement using the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale. CJEM. 2002;4(1):16–22. doi: 10.1017/s1481803500006023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Eitel DR, Travers DA, Rosenau AM, Gilboy N, Wuerz RC. The emergency severity index triage algorithm version 2 is reliable and valid. Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10(10):1070–80. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00577.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Lohr KN, Schroeder SA. A strategy for quality assurance in Medicare. N Engl J Med. 1990;322(10):707–12. doi: 10.1056/nejm199003083221031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Shelton R. The Emergency Severity Index 5-level triage system. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2009;28(1):9–12. doi: 10.1097/01.DCC.0000325106.28851.89. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Richardson JR, Braitberg G, Yeoh MJ. Multidisciplinary assessment at triage: a new way forward. Emerg Med Australas. 2004;16(1):41–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2004.00541.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Storm-Versloot MN, Ubbink DT, Chin a Choi V, Luitse JS. Observer agreement of the Manchester Triage System and the Emergency Severity Index: a simulation study. Emerg Med J. 2009;26(8):556–60. doi: 10.1136/emj.2008.059378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.van der Wulp I, Schrijvers AJ, van Stel HF. Predicting admission and mortality with the Emergency Severity Index and the Manchester Triage System: a retrospective observational study. Emerg Med J. 2009;26(7):506–9. doi: 10.1136/emj.2008.063768. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.R SR. the witching hour: overcrowded emergency departments7. Emerg Med news. 1992;(21):40–1. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Abbasi E NA, Nabipour I, Emami SR. Assessment of the level of knowledge of Physicians in Bushehr Province about preparedness and response for nuclear emergency. ISMJ. 2005;7:183–9. [Persion] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Esmailian M, Haj Zargarbashi E, Masoumi B, Karami M. Accuracy of Ultrasonography in Confirmation of Adequate Reduction of Distal Radius Fractures. Emergency. 2013;1(1):7–10. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Heydari F, Esmailian M, Dehghanniri M. Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography in the Initial Evaluation of Patients with Penetrating Chest Trauma. Emergency. 2014;2(2):77–80. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Göransson KE, Ehrenberg A, Marklund B, Ehnfors M. Emergency department triage: Is there a link between nurses’ personal characteristics and accuracy in triage decisions? Accid Emerg Nurs. 2006;14(2):83–8. doi: 10.1016/j.aaen.2005.12.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Goransson KE, von Rosen A. Interrater agreement: a comparison between two emergency department triage scales. Eur J Emerg Med. 2011;18(2):68–72. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32833ce4eb. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Goransson KE, Ehrenberg A, Ehnfors M. Triage in emergency departments: national survey. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(9):1067–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01191.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Worster A, Sardo A, Eva K, Fernandes CM, Upadhye S. Triage tool inter-rater reliability: a comparison of live versus paper case scenarios. J Emerg Nurs. 2007;33(4):319–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2006.12.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Martin A, Davidson CL, Panik A, Buckenmyer C, Delpais P, Ortiz M. An Examination of ESI Triage Scoring Accuracy in Relationship to ED Nursing Attitudes and Experience. J Emerg Nurs. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2013.09.009. [In Press] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Aloyce R, Leshabari S, Brysiewicz P. Assessment of knowledge and skills of triage amongst nurses working in the emergency centres in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Afr J Emerg Med. 2014;4(1):14–8. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Vatnøy TK, Fossum M, Smith N, Slettebø Å. Triage assessment of registered nurses in the emergency department. Int Emerg Nurs. 2013;21(2):89–96. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2012.06.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Hosseini M, Bekry G, Mozaffari HR, et al. Effect of Educational Intervention on Oral Health Behaviour based on Health Belief Model in Female Secondary School Students of Paveh in 2011. Edu Res Med Sci J. 2014;2(3):2–9. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Göransson KE, Ehrenberg A, Ehnfors M. Triage in emergency departments: national survey. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(9):1067–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01191.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Finamore SR, Turris SA. Shortening the wait: a strategy to reduce waiting times in the emergency department. J Emerg Nurs. 2009;35(6):509–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jen.2009.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]