Dataset Information

Implementation of a novel three-tier triage tool in Papua New Guinea: A model for resource-limited emergency departments.

ABSTRACT: In emergency departments (EDs), demand for care often exceeds the available resources. Triage addresses this problem by sorting patients into categories of urgency. The Interagency Integrated Triage Tool (IITT) is a novel triage system designed for resource-limited emergency care (EC) settings. The system was piloted by two EDs in Papua New Guinea as part of an EC capacity development program. Implementation involved a five-hour teaching program for all ED staff, complemented by training resources including flowcharts and reference guides. Clinical redesign helped optimise flow and infrastructure, and development of simple electronic registries enabled data collection. Local champions were identified, and experienced EC clinicians from Australia acted as mentors during system roll-out. Evaluation data suggests the IITT, and the associated change management process, have high levels of acceptance amongst staff. Subject to validation, the IITT may be relevant to other resource-limited EC settings.

SUBMITTER: Mitchell R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8315437 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Interagency Integrated Triage Tool (IITT) is a three-tier triage system designed for resource-limited emergency care (EC) settings. This study sought to assess the validity and reliability of a pilot version of the tool in an urban emergency department (ED) in Papua New Guinea.MethodsA pragmatic observational study was conducted at Gerehu General Hospital in Port Moresby, commencing eight weeks after IITT implementation. All ED patients presenting within the subsequent two-month period were included. Triage assessments were performed by a variety of ED clinicians, including community health workers, nurses and doctors. The primary outcome was sensitivity for the detection of time-critical illness, defined by ten pre-specified diagnoses. The association between triage category and ED outcomes was examined using Cramer's V correlation coefficient. Reliability was assessed by inter-rater agreement between a local and an experienced, external triage officer.FindingsAmong 4512 presentations during the study period, 58 (1.3%) were classified as category one (emergency), 967 (21.6%) as category two (priority) and 3478 (77.1%) as category three (non-urgent). The tool's sensitivity for detecting the pre-specified set of time-sensitive conditions was 70.8% (95%CI 58.2-81.4%), with negative predictive values of 97.3% (95%CI 96.7 - 97.8%) for admission/transfer and 99.9% (95%CI 99.7 - 100.0%) for death. The admission/transfer rate was 44.8% (26/58) among emergency patients, 22.9% (223/976) among priority patients and 2.7% (94/3478) among non-urgent patients (Cramer's V=0.351, p=0.00). Four of 58 (6.9%) emergency patients, 19/976 (2.0%) priority patients and 3/3478 (0.1%) non-urgent patients died in the ED (Cramer's V=0.14, p=0.00). The under-triage rate was 2.7% (94/3477) and the over-triage rate 48.2% (28/58), both within pre-specified limits of acceptability. On average, it took staff 3 minutes 34 seconds (SD 1:06) to determine and document a triage category. Among 70 observed assessments, weighted κ was 0.84 (excellent agreement).InterpretationThe pilot version of the IITT demonstrated acceptable performance characteristics, and validation in other EC settings is warranted.FundingThis project was funded through a Friendship Grant from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and an International Development Fund Grant from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundTriage implementation in resource-limited emergency departments (EDs) has traditionally relied on intensive in-person training. This study sought to evaluate the impact of a novel digital-based learning strategy focused on the Interagency Integrated Triage Tool, a three-tier triage instrument recommended by the World Health Organization.MethodsA mixed methods study utilising pre-post intervention methods was conducted in two EDs in Papua New Guinea. The primary outcome was the mean change in knowledge before and after completion of a voluntary, multimodal training program, primarily delivered through a digital learning platform accessible via smartphone. Secondary outcomes included the change in confidence to perform selected clinical tasks, and acceptability of the learning methods.FindingsAmong 136 eligible ED staff, 91 (66.9%) completed the digital learning program. The mean knowledge score on the post-training exam was 87.5% (SD 10.4), a mean increase of 12.9% (95% CI 10.7-15.1%, p < 0.0001) from the pre-training exam. There were statistically significant improvements in confidence for 13 of 15 clinical tasks, including undertaking a triage assessment and identifying an unwell patient.In an evaluation survey, 100% of 30 respondents agreed or strongly agreed the online learning platform was easy to access, use and navigate, and that the digital teaching methods were appropriate for their learning needs. In qualitative feedback, respondents reported that limited internet access and a lack of dedicated training time were barriers to participation.InterpretationThe use of digital learning to support triage implementation in resource-limited EDs is feasible and effective when accompanied by in-person mentoring. Adequate internet access is an essential pre-requisite.FundingDevelopment of the Kumul Helt Skul learning platform was undertaken as part of the Clinical Support Program (Phase II), facilitated by Johnstaff International Development on behalf of the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade through the PNG-Australia Partnership. RM is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Postgraduate Scholarship and a Monash Graduate Excellence Scholarship, while PC is supported by a Medical Research Future Fund Practitioner Fellowship. Funders had no role in study design, results analysis or manuscript preparation.

Project description:BackgroundFor several decades, emergency departments (EDs) utilization has increased, inducing ED overcrowding in many countries. This phenomenon is related partly to an excessive number of nonurgent patients. To resolve ED overcrowding and to decrease nonurgent visits, the most common solution has been to triage the ED patients to identify potentially nonurgent patients, i.e. which could have been dealt with by general practitioner. The objective of this study was to measure agreement among ED health professionals on the urgency of an ED visit, and to determine if the level of agreement is consistent among different sub-groups based on following explicit criteria: age, medical status, type of referral to the ED, investigations performed in the ED, and the discharge from the ED.MethodsWe conducted a multicentric cross-sectional study to compare agreement between nurses and physicians on categorization of ED visits into urgent or nonurgent. Subgroups stratified by criteria characterizing the ED visit were analyzed in relation to the outcome of the visit.ResultsOf 1,928 ED patients, 350 were excluded because data were lacking. The overall nurse-physician agreement on categorization was moderate (kappa = 0.43). The levels of agreement within all subgroups were variable and low. The highest agreement concerned three subgroups of complaints: cranial injury (kappa = 0.61), gynaecological (kappa = 0.66) and toxicology complaints (kappa = 1.00). The lowest agreement concerned two subgroups: urinary-nephrology (kappa = 0.09) and hospitalization (kappa = 0.20). When categorization of ED visits into urgent or nonurgent cases was compared to hospitalization, ED physicians had higher sensitivity and specificity than nurses (respectively 94.9% versus 89.5%, and 43.1% versus 30.9%).ConclusionsThe lack of physician-nurse agreement and the inability to predict hospitalization have important implications for patient safety. When urgency screening is used to determine treatment priority, disagreement might not matter because all patients in the ED are seen and treated. But using assessments as the basis for refusal of care to potential nonurgent patients raises legal, ethical, and safety issues. Managed care organizations should be cautious when applying such criteria to restrict access to EDs.

Project description:BackgroundOvercrowding in emergency departments is a worldwide problem. A systematic literature review was undertaken to scientifically explore which interventions improve patient flow in emergency departments.MethodsA systematic literature search for flow processes in emergency departments was followed by assessment of relevance and methodological quality of each individual study fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Studies were excluded if they did not present data on waiting time, length of stay, patients leaving the emergency department without being seen or other flow parameters based on a nonselected material of patients. Only studies with a control group, either in a randomized controlled trial or in an observational study with historical controls, were included. For each intervention, the level of scientific evidence was rated according to the GRADE system, launched by a WHO-supported working group.ResultsThe interventions were grouped into streaming, fast track, team triage, point-of-care testing (performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department), and nurse-requested x-ray. Thirty-three studies, including over 800,000 patients in total, were included. Scientific evidence on the effect of fast track on waiting time, length of stay, and left without being seen was moderately strong. The effect of team triage on left without being seen was relatively strong, but the evidence for all other interventions was limited or insufficient.ConclusionsIntroducing fast track for patients with less severe symptoms results in shorter waiting time, shorter length of stay, and fewer patients leaving without being seen. Team triage, with a physician in the team, will probably result in shorter waiting time and shorter length of stay and most likely in fewer patients leaving without being seen. There is only limited scientific evidence that streaming of patients into different tracks, performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department or having nurses to request certain x-rays results in shorter waiting time and length of stay.

Project description:IntroductionAdvanced practice providers (APP), including physicians' assistants and nurse practitioners, have been increasingly incorporated into emergency department (ED) staffing over the past decade. There is scant literature examining resource utilization and the cost benefit of having APPs in the ED. The objectives of this study were to compare resource utilization in EDs that use APPs in their staffing model with those that do not and to estimate costs associated with the utilized resources.MethodsIn this five-year retrospective secondary data analysis of the Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA), we compared resource utilization rates in EDs with and without APPs in non-academic EDs. Primary outcomes were hospital admission and use of computed tomography (CT), radiography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Costs were estimated using the 2014 physician fee schedule and inpatient payments from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We measured outcomes as rates per 100 visits. Data were analyzed using a mixed linear model with repeated measures, adjusted for annual volume, patient acuity, and attending hours. We used the adjusted net difference to project utilization costs between the two groups per 1000 visits.ResultsOf the 1054 EDs included in this study, 79% employed APPs. Relative to EDs without APPs, EDs staffing APPs had higher resource utilization rates (use per 100 visits): 3.0 more admissions (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-4.1), 1.7 more CTs (95% CI, 0.2-3.1), 4.5 more radiographs (95% CI, 2.2-6.9), and 1.0 more ultrasound (95% CI, 0.3-1.7) but comparable MRI use 0.1 (95% CI, -0.2-0.3). Projected costs of these differences varied among the resource utilized. Compared to EDs without APPs, EDs with APPs were estimated to have 30.4 more admissions per 1000 visits, which could accrue $414,717 in utilization costs.ConclusionEDs staffing APPs were associated with modest increases in resource utilization as measured by admissions and imaging studies.

Dataset Information

Implementation of a novel three-tier triage tool in Papua New Guinea: A model for resource-limited emergency departments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets