Dataset Information

Safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours care: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Telephone triage in patients requesting help may compromise patient safety, particularly if urgency is underestimated and the patient is not seen by a physician. The aim was to assess the research evidence on safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours primary care.

Methods

A systematic review was performed of published research on telephone triage in out-of-hours care, searching in PubMed and EMBASE up to March 2010. Studies were included if they concerned out-of-hours medical care and focused on telephone triage in patients with a first request for help. Study inclusion and data extraction were performed by two researchers independently. Post-hoc two types of studies were distinguished: observational studies in contacts with real patients (unselected and highly urgent contacts), and prospective observational studies using high-risk simulated patients (with a highly urgent health problem).

Results

Thirteen observational studies showed that on average triage was safe in 97% (95% CI 96.5-97.4%) of all patients contacting out-of-hours care and in 89% (95% CI 86.7-90.2%) of patients with high urgency. Ten studies that used high-risk simulated patients showed that on average 46% (95% CI 42.7-49.8%) were safe. Adverse events described in the studies included mortality (n = 6 studies), hospitalisations (n = 5), attendance at emergency department (n=1), and medical errors (n = 6).

Conclusions

There is room for improvement in safety of telephone triage in patients who present symptoms that are high risk. As these have a low incidence, recognition of these calls poses a challenge to health care providers in daily practice.

SUBMITTER: Huibers L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3308461 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours care: a systematic review.

Huibers Linda L Smits Marleen M Renaud Vera V Giesen Paul P Wensing Michel M

Scandinavian journal of primary health care 20111201 4

<h4>Objective</h4>Telephone triage in patients requesting help may compromise patient safety, particularly if urgency is underestimated and the patient is not seen by a physician. The aim was to assess the research evidence on safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours primary care.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review was performed of published research on telephone triage in out-of-hours care, searching in PubMed and EMBASE up to March 2010. Studies were included if they concerned out-of-hours m ...[more]

PMID: 22126218

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To explore and compare safety, efficiency, and health-related quality of telephone triage in out-of-hours primary care (OOH-PC) services performed by general practitioners (GPs), nurses using a computerised decision support system (CDSS), or physicians with different medical specialities. METHODS:Natural quasi-experimental cross-sectional study conducted in November and December 2016. We randomly selected 1294 audio-recorded telephone triage calls from two Danish OOH-PC services triaged by GPs (n?=?423), nurses using CDSS (n?=?430), or physicians with different medical specialities (n?=?441). An assessment panel of 24 physicians used a validated assessment tool (Assessment of Quality in Telephone Triage - AQTT) to assess all telephone triage calls and measured health-related quality, safety, and efficiency of triage. RESULTS:The relative risk (RR) of poor quality was significantly lower for nurses compared to GPs in four out of ten items regarding identifying and uncovering of problems. For most items, the quality tended to be lowest for physicians with different medical specialities. Compared to calls triaged by GPs (reference), the risk of clinically relevant undertriage was significantly lower for nurses, while physicians with different medical specialties had a similar risk (GP: 7.3%, nurse: 3.7%, physician: 6.1%). The risk of clinically relevant overtriage was significantly higher for nurses (9.1%) and physicians with different medical specialities (8.2%) compared to GPs (4.3%). GPs had significantly shorter calls (mean: 2?min 57?s, SD: 105?s) than nurses (mean: 4?min 44?s, SD: 168?s). CONCLUSIONS:Our explorative study indicated that nurses using CDSS performed better than GPs in telephone triage on a large number of health-related items, had a lower level of clinically relevant undertriage, but were perceived less efficient. Calls triaged by physicians with different medical specialities were perceived less safe and less efficient compared to GPs. Differences in the organisation of telephone triage may influence the distribution of workload in primary and secondary OOH services. Future research could compare the long-term outcomes following a telephone call to OOH-PC related to safety and efficiency.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In the Netherlands, the 'Netherlands Triage Standard' (NTS) is frequently used as digital decision support system for telephone triage at out-of-hours services in primary care (OHS-PC). The aim of the NTS is to guarantee accessible, efficient and safe care. However, there are indications that current triage is inefficient, with overestimation of urgency, notably in suspected acute cardiovascular disease. In addition, in primary care settings the NTS has only been validated against surrogate markers, and diagnostic accuracy with clinical outcomes as the reference is unknown. In the Safety First study, we address this gap in knowledge by describing, understanding and improving the diagnostic process and urgency allocation in callers with symptoms suggestive of acute cardiovascular disease, in order to improve both efficiency and safety of telephone triage in this domain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:An observational study in which 3000 telephone triage recordings (period 2014-2016) will be analysed. Information is collected from the recordings including caller and symptom characteristics and urgency allocation. The callers' own general practitioners are contacted for the final diagnosis of each contact. We included recordings of callers with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/stroke. With univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses the diagnostic accuracy of caller and symptom characteristics will be analysed in terms of predictive values with urgency level, and ACS and TIA/stroke as outcomes, respectively. To further improve our understanding of the triage process at OHS-PC, we will carry out additional studies applying both quantitative and qualitative methods: (i) case-control study on serious adverse events (SAE), (ii) conversation analysis study and (iii) interview study with triage nurses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The Medical Ethics Committee Utrecht, the Netherlands endorsed this study (National Trial Register identification: NTR7331). Results will be disseminated at scientific conferences, regional educational sessions and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the quality of communication in out-of-hours (OOH) telephone triage conducted by general practitioners (GPs), nurses using a computerised decision support system and physicians with different medical specialities, and to explore the association between communication quality and efficiency, length of call and the accuracy of telephone triage.DesignNatural quasi-experimental cross-sectional study.SettingTwo Danish OOH services using different telephone triage models: a GP cooperative and the medical helpline 1813.Participants1294 audio-recorded randomly selected OOH telephone triage calls from 2016 conducted by GPs (n=423), nurses using CDSS (n=430) and physicians with different medical specialities (n=441).Main outcome measuresTwenty-four physicians assessed the calls. The panel used a validated assessment tool (Assessment of Quality in Telephone Triage, AQTT) to measure nine aspects of communication, overall perceived communication quality, efficiency and length of call.ResultsThe risk of poor quality was significantly higher in calls triaged by GPs compared with calls triaged by nurses regarding 'allowing the caller to describe the situation' (GP: 13.5% nurse: 9.8%), 'mastering questioning techniques' (GP: 27.4% nurse: 21.1%), 'summarising' (GP: 33.0% nurse: 21.0%) and 'paying attention to caller's experience' (GP: 25.7% nurse: 17.0%). The risk of poor quality was significantly higher in calls triaged by physicians compared with calls triaged by GPs in five out of nine items. GP calls were significantly shorter (2 min 57 s) than nurse calls (4 min 44 s) and physician calls (4 min 1 s). Undertriaged calls were rated lower than optimally triaged calls for overall quality of communication (p<0.001) and all specific items.ConclusionsCompared with telephone triage by GPs, the communication quality was higher in calls triaged by nurses and lower in calls triaged by physicians with different medical specialities. However, calls triaged by nurses and physicians were longer and perceived less efficient. Quality of communication was associated with accurate triage.

Project description:ObjectiveTo undertake an economic evaluation of nurse telephone consultation using decision support software in comparison with usual general practice care provided by a general practice cooperative.DesignCost analysis from an NHS perspective using stochastic data from a randomised controlled trial.SettingGeneral practice cooperative with 55 general practitioners serving 97 000 registered patients in Wiltshire, England.SubjectsAll patients contacting the service, or about whom the service was contacted during the trial year (January 1997 to January 1998).Main outcome measuresCosts and savings to the NHS during the trial year.ResultsThe cost of providing nurse telephone consultation was 81 237 pound sterling per annum. This, however, determined a 94 422 pound sterling reduction of other costs for the NHS arising from reduced emergency admissions to hospital. Using point estimates for savings, the cost analysis, combined with the analysis of outcomes, showed a dominance situation for the intervention over general practice cooperative care alone. If a larger improvement in outcomes is assumed (upper 95% confidence limit) NHS savings increase to 123 824 pound sterling per annum. Savings of only 3728 pound sterling would, however, arise in a scenario where lower 95% confidence limits for outcome differences were observed. To break even, the intervention would have needed to save 138 emergency hospital admissions per year, around 90% of the effect achieved in the trial. Additional savings of 16 928 pound sterling for general practice arose from reduced travel to visit patients at home and fewer surgery appointments within three days of a call.ConclusionsNurse telephone consultation in out of hours primary care may reduce NHS costs in the long term by reducing demand for emergency admission to hospital. General practitioners currently bear most of the cost of nurse telephone consultation and benefit least from the savings associated with it. This indicates that the service produces benefits in terms of service quality, which are beyond the reach of this cost analysis.

Project description:ObjectivesOut-of-hours (OOH) telephone triage is used to manage patient flow, but knowledge of the communicative skills of telephone triagists is limited. The aims of this study were to compare communicative parameters in general practitioner (GP)-led and nurse-led OOH telephone triage and to discuss differences in relation to patient-centred communication and safety issues.DesignObservational study.SettingTwo Danish OOH settings: a large-scale general practitioner cooperative in the Central Denmark Region (n=100 GP-led triage conversations) and Medical Helpline 1813 in the Capital Region of Denmark (n=100 nurse-led triage conversations with use of a clinical decision support system).Participants200 audio-recorded telephone triage conversations randomly selected.Primary and secondary outcome measuresConversations were compared with regard to length of call, distribution of speaking time, question types, callers' expression of negative affect, and nurses' and GPs' responses to callers' negative affectivity using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Student's t-test.ResultsCompared with GPs, nurses had longer telephone contacts (137s vs 264 s, p=0.001) and asked significantly more questions (5 vs 9 questions, p=0.001). In 36% of nurse-led triage conversations, triage nurses either transferred the call to a physician or had to confer the call with a physician. Nurses gave the callers significantly more spontaneous talking time than GPs (23.4s vs 17.9 s, p=0.01). Compared with nurses, GPs seemed more likely to give an emphatic response when a caller spontaneously expressed concern; however, this difference was not statistically significant (36% vs 29%, p=0.6).ConclusionsWhen comparing communicative parameters in GP-led and nurse-led triage, several differences were observed. However, the impact of these differences in the perspective of patient-centred communication and safety needs further research. More knowledge is needed to determine what characterises good quality in telephone triage communication.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate service use, clinical outcomes and user experience related to telephone-based digital triage in urgent care.DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for literature published between 1 March 2000 and 1 April 2020.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies of any design investigating patterns of triage advice, wider service use, clinical outcomes and user experience relating to telephone based digital triage in urgent care.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers extracted data and conducted quality assessments using the mixed methods appraisal tool. Narrative synthesis was used to analyse findings.ResultsThirty-one studies were included, with the majority being UK based; most investigated nurse-led digital triage (n=26). Eight evaluated the impact on wider healthcare service use following digital triage implementation, typically reporting reduction or no change in service use. Six investigated patient level service use, showing mixed findings relating to patients' adherence with triage advice. Evaluation of clinical outcomes was limited. Four studies reported on hospitalisation rates of digitally triaged patients and highlighted potential triage errors where patients appeared to have not been given sufficiently high urgency advice. Overall, service users reported high levels of satisfaction, in studies of both clinician and non-clinician led digital triage, but with some dissatisfaction over the relevance and number of triage questions.ConclusionsFurther research is needed into patient level service use, including patients' adherence with triage advice and how this influences subsequent use of services. Further evaluation of clinical outcomes using larger datasets and comparison of different digital triage systems is needed to explore consistency and safety. The safety and effectiveness of non-clinician led digital triage also needs evaluation. Such evidence should contribute to improvement of digital triage tools and service delivery.Prospero registration numberCRD42020178500.

Dataset Information

Safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours care: a systematic review.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours care: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets