Table 7.

The quality of communication, length of calls and perceived efficiency for all calls comparing undertriaged and overtriaged calls with optimally triaged calls for all health professionals together

Communicative items (AQTT)	Undertriaged 1–3	Optimally triaged 4	Overtriaged 5–7
	Median (10th and 90th percentile)	Median (10th and 90th percentile)	Median (10th and 90th percentile)
Overall perceived communication†	5 (2 to 8)**	7 (4 to 9)	6 (3 to 9)**
Overall perceived efficiency†	5 (1 to 8)**	8 (3 to 10)	6 (2 to 9)**
Length of call†	230 (98 to 471)*	197 (90 to 426)	198 (81.2 to 427)
12: Gives the caller sufficient time and space to describe the situation†	3 (2 to 4)**	4 (3 to 5)	4 (2 to 5)*
13: Conducts the conversation in understandable language adapted to the caller’s situation†	4 (2 to 5)**	4 (3 to 5)	4 (3 to 5)*
14: Ensures that the triage decision and the advice given are understandable and feasible†	3 (2 to 5)**	4 (3 to 5)	3 (3 to 5)*
15: Ensures that the caller agrees on the triage decision and advice given and is accommodating in case of disagreement†	3 (2 to 5)**	4 (3 to 5)	3 (2 to 5)*
16: Structures the conversation†	3 (2 to 4)**	4 (2 to 5)	3 (2 to 4)**
17: Masters suitable questioning techniques (including suitable use of open-ended, closed-ended and non-leading questions)†	3 (1 to 4)**	3 (2 to 4)	3 (2 to 4)**
18: Summarises (if relevant), verifies and adjusts if needed†	3 (2 to 4)**	3 (2 to 4)	3 (2 to 4)*
19: Pays attention to the caller’s experience and situation†	3 (2 to 4)**	3 (2 to 5)	3 (2 to 5)*
20: Conducts the conversation in an accommodating and friendly tone†	4 (3 to 5)**	4 (3 to 5)	4 (3 to 5)**

Rating scale for item 11 assessing accuracy of triage decision with definitions of each rating: 1. Severe undertriage: the call is undertriaged with risk of severe consequences; 2. Moderate undertriage: the call is undertriaged, but unlikely with risk of severe consequences; 3. Mild undertriage: the call is undertriaged, but could have been triaged ‘somewhat higher’; 4. Optimal triage: the call is optimally triaged; 5. Mild overtriage: the call is overtriaged, but could have been triaged ‘somewhat lower’; 6. Moderate overtriage: the call is overtriaged, it would have been sufficient with a ‘less burdensome service’; 7. Severe overtriage: the call is overtriaged; it seems completely irrelevant to choose this triage outcome.

Perceived accuracy of triage for all health professionals (n=1294): cumulated undertriage (ie, ‘1’, ‘2’ and ‘3’) (n=189), optimal triage (ie, ‘4’) (n=820), overtriage (ie, ‘5’, ‘6’ and ‘7’) (n=223), ‘not applicable’ (n=62).

Median (10th to 90th percentile): Mann-Whitney U-test was used to pairwise compare rank sum between undertriaged versus optimally triage and overtriaged versus optimally triaged, significance level *p<0.05, **p<0.001.

†Indicates a significant difference (p<0.05) in rank sum between calls that are perceived as undertriaged, optimally triaged and undertriaged, using Kruskal-Wallis