Effectiveness of nurse triage in the emergency department of an urban county hospital

A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of nurse-led triage of 911 calls

To better connect non-emergent 911 callers to appropriate care, Washington, DC, routed low-acuity callers to nurses. Nurses could provide non-emergent transportation to a health centre, recommend self-care or return callers to the traditional 911 system. Over about one year, 6,053 callers were randomized (1:1) to receive a business-as-usual response (ncontrol = 3,023) or further triage (ntreatment = 3,030). We report on seven of nine outcomes, which were pre-registered ( https://osf.io/xderw ). The proportion of calls resulting in an ambulance dispatch dropped from 97% to 56% (β = -1.216 (-1.324, -1.108), P < 0.001), and those resulting in an ambulance transport dropped from 73% to 45% (β = -3.376 (-3.615, -3.137), P < 0.001). Among those callers who were Medicaid beneficiaries, within 24 hours, the proportion of calls resulting in an emergency department visit for issues classified as non-emergent or primary care physician (PCP) treatable dropped from 29.5% to 25.1% (β = -0.230 (-0.391, -0.069), P < 0.001), and the proportion resulting in the caller visiting a PCP rose from 2.5% to 8.2% (β = 1.252 (0.889, 1.615), P < 0.001). Over the longer time span of six months, we failed to detect evidence of impacts on emergency department visits, PCP visits or Medicaid expenditures. From a safety perspective, 13 callers randomized to treatment were eventually diagnosed with a time-sensitive illness, all of whom were quickly triaged to an ambulance response. These short-term effects suggest that nurse-led triage of non-emergent calls can safely connect callers to more appropriate, timely care.

Nurse-led triage of acute medical admissions: accurate and time-efficient

In many hospitals a variety of triage systems are used by senior medical staff to identify likely length of stay (LOS) of acute medical admissions and thus facilitate a streamlined admission under either acute medicine or general internal medicine (GIM). The authors evaluated if senior nursing staff on the medical assessment unit could triage patients depending on their predicted LOS as accurately as consultant acute physicians. Each of 193 medical admissions were independently triaged by both groups to either acute medicine (<48 hours) or GIM (>48 hours) depending on predicted LOS. The accuracy of patient triage was identical for senior nursing staff and consultants (80.8% vs 81.9%), when 95% confidence intervals are taken into account. Nursing staff triaged patients a mean of 8.5 hours earlier than consultants. This study demonstrates that triage of acute medical admissions is a practical extension of the senior nursing role and has been successfully implemented, with accuracy of nursing triage (83.5%) being maintained in a repeat study 6 months later.

Quality assurance of nurse triage: consistency of results over three years

The study objective was to evaluate the capability and the consistency of the triage nurse to categorize correctly emergency patients and its impact on the waiting time for physician examination over a period of 3 years. The study was performed at the emergency department of the Barzilai Medical Center, Ashkelon, Israel. A retrospective review of the medical records was performed. All patients who were examined by a triage nurse during 2 randomly chosen consecutive weeks during the years 1995 and 1998 participated. All the medical records were reviewed by the authors and the following information was extracted from the medical records: nurse triage category, time of initial evaluation by a triage nurse, duration of employment of the nurse in the ED, and her experience as a triage nurse, time of initial examination by a physician, the total length of stay in the ED, the history taken by the triage nurse and the physician, and the physician's urgency category. Patient in urgency category 1 is a patient whose condition may deteriorate if not examined within 1 hour; patient in category 2 is a patient whose condition may deteriorate if not examined within 2 hours; category 3 is all the rest. Any deterioration and or delay of treatment of the patients were also recorded. Data concerning patients with an initial complaint of chest pain were extracted separately. The data were analyzed using the SPSS software and the results were tested by the student t test and chi square test. Interobserver agreement was measured using the kappa value. A total of 2,886 completely full medical records were reviewed by the authors: 1,310 records from period I (1995) and 1576 from period II (1998). Of the patients 92% and 88.2% were classified by the triage nurse as category 3 in periods I and II respectively, 7% and 9.8% as category 2, and 1% and 2% as category 1 respectively. Full agreement of triage category between nurse and physician was found in 90.5% of the cases in period I and 93% in period II (kappa = 0.90 and kappa = 0.93 respectively). In period I, 70% of the patients in category 1 were examined by a physician in 1 hour versus 100% in period II. Almost all the patients in category 2 were examined within 2 hours (98%, 97%), and 98% of those in category 3 were examined within 3 hours. The average waiting time for physician examination in category 1 patients dropped from 43.1 minutes in period I to 18.2 minutes in period II. The average waiting time for the triage nurse was 9 minutes in period I, and 7.42 minutes in period II. The average length of stay in the ED in period I was 1 hour and 24 minutes and 1 hour and 30 minutes in period II. Of the anamneses taken by the triage nurse 91.8% were fully identical with the physicians' anamneses, but in period II this percentage jumped to 98%. Patients with chest pain were categorized correctly by the triage nurse in 76.8% of the cases in period I and 72.4% in period II, with an overtriage of 18.6% and 20.7% respectively (kappa = 0.75, kappa = 0.70 respectively). In our study, nurse triage was safe and effective in classifying patients to urgency categories. The results are consistent and even improved over a 3-year period. The rates of incorrect classification, deterioration, and delay of treatment of patients because of incorrect triage are very low. Most of the patients were examined by the physician within the expected time. Triage nurse predicted correctly the urgency category of patients with chest in most of the cases and the rate of missing acute coronary events was very low.

Primary care physician and patient factors that result in patients seeking emergency care in a hospital setting: the patient's perspective

Much has been written about "abuse" and "overutilization" of Emergency Departments (EDs). We undertook to study, from the patient's perspective, physician and patient factors that influence the patient's decision to seek ED care. The study was designed as a convenience cohort, multi-centre survey, conducted in 13 hospitals in the Greater Toronto Area. In our study group of 948, most ambulatory patients (93%) seeking care in an ED have a primary care physician. From the patient's perspective, most (76%) primary care physicians are not educating their patients about which situations warrant ED care and up to 54% are not informing their patients about which services are offered in the office. As many as 55% of patients presented to the ED because it was more convenient. Only a minority (23%) of patients felt their acuity of illness warranted an ED visit. Primary care physicians need to play a stronger role in educating their patients about the utilization of emergency care and the services offered in the office setting.

Adverse outcomes of managed care gatekeeping

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether telephone preauthorization for reimbursement of ED care (medical "gate-keeping") by managed care organizations (MCOs) is associated with adverse outcomes.

METHODS

A structured review was performed of case reports solicited during 1994 and 1995 with possible adverse outcomes related to managed care gatekeeping. Gatekeeping was defined as the requirement imposed by an MCO that ED staff contact on-call gatekeepers (i.e., clinical or nonclinical MCO personnel) to request preauthorization for ED treatment (a requirement that such MCOs enforce by refusing payment for the ED care unless preauthorization is obtained). Cases in which gatekeeper denial of preauthorization occurred were sought. Two physicians agreed on patient eligibility and classification criteria, then independently, retrospectively classified case reports identified as MCO ED payment denials into 1 of 4 categories: 1) adverse outcome; 2) patient placed at increased risk of death or disability; 3) "near miss" (emergency physicians prevented adverse outcome by caring for patient despite denial); and 4) none of the above.

RESULTS

Of the 143 cases reviewed, 29 reports represented MCO ED payment denial. Of these 29 eligible cases, there were 4 (14%) patients with adverse outcomes, 4 (14%) patients placed at increased risk, and 21 (72%) near misses. All of the 29 cases came from different EDs, representing 9 different states, with the majority from California. Adverse outcomes included respiratory failure from fulminant meningococcemia, hypovolemic syncope from ruptured ectopic pregnancy, hypovolemic arrest from vascular fibroid hemorrhage necessitating emergency hysterectomy, and prolonged postoperative course following ruptured duodenal ulcer. Patients placed at increased risk were diagnosed as having epiglottitis, myocardial infarction, ruptured ectopic pregnancy, and delayed treatment of hip septic arthritis. Near misses included diagnoses of ectopic pregnancy (n = 2), pneumothorax (n = 2), alcohol withdrawal seizures and pancreatitis necessitating intensive care unit admission, appendicitis, bacterial meningitis, cerebrovascular accident, cryptococal meningitis in immuno comprised host, endocarditis, incarerated inguinal hernia, meningocococemia, meninoccocal meningitis, peritonsillar abscess, pneumococcal meningitis, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, shock from gastrointestinal bleeding, small bowel obstruction, schizophrenic crisis resulting in psychiatric hospitalization, suicidal depression resulting in psychiatric hospitalization, and unstable angina.

CONCLUSION

Adverse outcomes occur with MCO gatekeeping, Although the present study cannot ascertain whether this is a frequent event or a rare one, the safety of MCO gatekeeping deserves further study.

Emergency department triage: a program assessment using the tools of continuous quality improvement

An assessment was undertaken in the emergency department of a busy tertiary care center to illustrate the role of continuous quality improvement in the evaluation of an emergency triage program that utilizes the emergency medical attendant to provide triage. An evaluation team interviewed triage staff, charge nurses, internal customers, risk management, and the patient representative. A detailed review of staff job descriptions, organization charts, orientation manual, and physical facilities was conducted. A chart audit was completed on 100 triage notes. Direct observation was undertaken on nine occasions. An evaluation of the data gathered was performed using the tools of continuous quality improvement, and resulted in specific recommendations being made to improve the process of care. It was concluded that emergency medical attendants function very well in an emergency medicine triage system and the tools of continuous quality improvement can be applied to a clinical service to improve the quality of care.

Use of continuous quality improvement to facilitate patient flow through the triage and fast-track areas of an emergency department

Application of Continuous Quality Improvement techniques can identify (a) major causes of delay in evaluation and treatment of ambulatory patients in an Emergency Department (ED) and (b) rational solutions to reduce those delays. To confirm this hypothesis, a prospective interventional study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital with 50,000 emergency visits per year. Participants included all patients discharged from the ED in three separate time periods. A formal continuous quality improvement process was used to document the current process of ambulatory care patient flow and prioritize the causes of delay. Solutions were defined and presented to the hospital administration. Two solutions were implemented immediately. The effect of these changes was assessed by comparing the time interval from presentation to discharge from the ED (length of stay) and the time interval from presentation to generation of a chart (chart generation). These differences were compared by analysis of variance on consecutive patients seen in a 48-hour control period and two postintervention 48-hour periods. The interventions that were identified and immediately implemented were the addition of an admission clerk and the reduction of the Fast-Track nurse function to include only patient placement and vital signs. The length of stay for all patients was significantly reduced from a mean of 163 +/- 170 min to 115 +/- 86 and 122 +/- 105 min in two separate postintervention 48-hour samples. The mean length of stay for Fast-Track patients not requiring X-ray, electrocardiogram, or blood tests was 92 +/- 46 min. After the intervention, this was reduced to 73 +/- 46 and 67 +/- 31 min in the same two 48-hour samples. Chart generation times were significantly reduced from a mean of 21 +/- 18 min to 8 +/- 6 min. We conclude that the formal application of Continuous Quality Improvement techniques in the Emergency Department can result in appropriate changes in the process of patient flow, leading to measurable and significant reductions in length of stay for Fast-Track patients.

Refusing care to emergency department of patients: evaluation of published triage guidelines

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a set of published triage guidelines identifies patients who can safely be refused emergency department care.

DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SETTING

A public hospital ED.

TYPE OF PARTICIPANTS

All patients triaged during a one-week period who were not in the most acute triage category.

MEASUREMENTS

Two ED nurses, blinded to the study hypothesis, reviewed each triage sheet to determine whether the case met the published guidelines for refusing care. In addition, each ED record was reviewed for appropriateness; a visit was considered appropriate only if predetermined, explicit criteria were met and an emergency physician agreed that a 24-hour delay in care might have worsened the patient's outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 106 patients who would have been refused care according to the triage guidelines, 35 (33%) had appropriate visits. Four were hospitalized.

CONCLUSION

When tested in our patient population, the triage guidelines were not sufficiently sensitive to identify patients who needed ED care. Broad application of these guidelines may jeopardize the health of some patients.

Do formal controls always achieve control? The case of triage in accident and emergency departments

Triage is the term used to describe the formal process of assigning urgency categories to patients arriving in a hospital accident and emergency department. This paper uses insights from literature on management control, medical sociology and nursing to illuminate the results of a research study comparing formal triage with an informal prioritisation process carried out by nurses. Topics discussed include whether triage is a bureaucratic process, whether it allows nurses' intuition to be expressed, whether it masks the urgency of the condition of the small number of seriously injured or ill patients, and whether responsibility for decisions on urgency should be separated from responsibility to act on those decisions. It is concluded that managers must consider these questions in the light of arrangements in their own hospital; departmental layout as well as the nursing staff's experience and commitment need to be taken into account.

Differences in priorities assigned to patients by triage nurses and by consultant physicians in accident and emergency departments

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the greater urgency assigned to accident and emergency patients by triage nurses than by accident and emergency doctors was uniform across all patient groups.

DESIGN

Patients attending an accident and emergency department between 8.00 am and 9.00 pm over a six week period were assessed prospectively for degree of urgency by triage nurses, and retrospectively for urgency by one of two consultant accident and emergency doctors. Patients were grouped according to their clinical mode of presentation.

SETTING

An accident and emergency department of a district general hospital in the Midlands, UK, in 1990.

PATIENTS

1213 patients who presented over six weeks.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

As might be expected, patients' conditions were assessed as being more urgent prospectively than retrospectively. This finding, however, was not uniform across all patient groups. Nurses' assessments of urgency tended to favour children and patients who presented with eye complaints and gave less priority to medical cases, particularly those with cardiorespiratory symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have implications for all those involved in the organisation of triage systems and in the training of nurses in accident and emergency departments. It is essential that judgements on how urgently patients need to be seen are made in a completely objective manner.

Piloting an evaluation of triage

This paper takes a broad view of the work involved in pilot studies of evaluation research. Drawing on their experience of preparation for a field experiment in a British Accident and Emergency department, which was to evaluate the effectiveness of a nurse triage system, the authors stress the importance of careful observation of the system to be studied, in the environment in which it is to be studied. In addition, the usual evaluations of research instruments which comprise formal pilot studies are included.

Evaluation of nurse triage in a British accident and emergency department

OBJECTIVE

To compare formal nurse triage with an informal prioritisation process for waiting times and patient satisfaction.

SETTING

Accident and emergency department of a district general hospital in the midlands in 1990.

DESIGN

Patients attending between 8:00 am and 9:00 pm over six weeks were grouped for analysis according to whether triage was operating at time of presentation and by their degree of urgency as assessed retrospectively by an accident and emergency consultant.

PATIENTS

5954 patients presenting over six weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time waited between first attendance in the department and obtaining medical attention, and patient satisfaction measured by questionnaire.

RESULTS

Complete data on waiting time were collected on 5037 patients (85%). Only 1213 of the 2515 (48%) patients presenting during the triage period were seen by a triage nurse. Patients in the triage group waited longer than those in the no triage group in all four retrospective priority categories, though differences were significant for only the two most urgent categories (difference in median waiting time 10.5 (95% confidence interval 3.5 to 14) min for category 1 and 8.5 (3 to 12) min for category 2). Responses to the patient satisfaction questionnaire were similar in the two groups except for the question relating to anxiety relating to pain.

CONCLUSIONS

This study fails to show the benefits claimed for formal nurse triage. Nurse triage may impose additional delay for patient treatment, particularly among patients needing the most urgent attention.

The Hungarian model of an emergency admission and care department

In 1976 an independent department was established for the emergency treatment of patients in the county hospital in Szolnok, Hungary. The new system changed the traditional structure of patient flow and the work plan of other departments, and it influenced the curing and nursing activities of the departments. The reorganization resulted in decreased waiting time, enhanced primary treatment, and a lessening in the mortality rate.