Reliability of computerized emergency triage.

OBJECTIVES Emergency department (ED) triage prioritizes patients based on urgency of care. This study compared agreement between two blinded, independent users of a Web-based triage tool (eTRIAGE) and examined the effects of ED crowding on triage reliability. METHODS Consecutive patients presenting to a large, urban, tertiary care ED were assessed by the duty triage nurse and an independent study nurse, both using eTRIAGE. Triage score distribution and agreement are reported. The study nurse collected data on ED activity, and agreement during different levels of ED crowding is reported. Two methods of interrater agreement were used: the linear-weighted kappa and quadratic-weighted kappa. RESULTS A total of 575 patients were assessed over nine weeks, and complete data were available for 569 patients (99.0%). Agreement between the two nurses was moderate if using linear kappa (weighted kappa = 0.52; 95% confidence interval = 0.46 to 0.57) and good if using quadratic kappa (weighted kappa = 0.66; 95% confidence interval = 0.60 to 0.71). ED overcrowding data were available for 353 patients (62.0%). Agreement did not significantly differ with respect to periods of ambulance diversion, number of admitted inpatients occupying stretchers, number of patients in the waiting room, number of patients registered in two hours, or nurse perception of busyness. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated different agreement depending on the method used to calculate interrater reliability. Using the standard methods, it found good agreement between two independent users of a computerized triage tool. The level of agreement was not affected by various measures of ED crowding.

[1]  O. Djurdjev,et al.  How reliable is emergency department triage? , 1999, Annals of emergency medicine.

[2]  B J Skipper,et al.  Does a physician visual assessment change triage? , 1997, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[3]  M. J Bullard.  Evaluation of Triage Nurse Satisfaction with Training and Use of an Electronic Triage Tool , 2003 .

[4]  D. Schriger,et al.  Effect of visual cues, vital signs, and protocols on triage: a prospective randomized crossover trial. , 1998, Annals of emergency medicine.

[5]  S. Walter,et al.  Inter-observer agreement using the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale. , 2002, CJEM.

[6]  R. Beveridge,et al.  CAEP issues. The Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale: a new and critical element in health care reform. Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. , 1998, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[7]  G. Innes,et al.  Inter-rater reliability of a computerized presenting-complaint-linked triage system in an urban emergency department. , 2003, CJEM.

[8]  Does the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale Correlate with Admission to the Hospital from the Emergency Department , 2004 .

[9]  S. Walter,et al.  Reliability of the Canadian emergency department triage and acuity scale: interrater agreement. , 1999, Annals of emergency medicine.

[10]  Richard C. Wuerz,et al.  Inconsistency of Emergency Department Triage , 1998 .

[11]  M. Bullard,et al.  [Revisions to the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale implementation guidelines]. , 2004, CJEM.

[12]  Julie Considine,et al.  The Australasian Triage Scale: examining emergency department nurses' performance using computer and paper scenarios. , 2004, Annals of emergency medicine.

[13]  G. Innes,et al.  Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS) Presenting Complaint List (Version 1.0). , 2003, CJEM.

[14]  Judith Tintinalli,et al.  Five-level triage system more effective than three-level in tertiary emergency department. , 2002, Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association.

[15]  D Richardson,et al.  No relationship between emergency department activity and triage categorization. , 1998, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[16]  A. Feinstein,et al.  Clinical biostatistics: LIV. The biostatistics of concordance , 1981 .

[17]  Ian Colman,et al.  Emergency triage: comparing a novel computer triage program with standard triage. , 2005, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[18]  P. Yarnold,et al.  Reliability and validity of scores on The Emergency Severity Index version 3. , 2004, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[19]  D. Eitel,et al.  The emergency severity index triage algorithm version 2 is reliable and valid. , 2003, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[20]  Stephen Pax Leonard,et al.  Consistency of retrospective triage decisions as a standardised instrument for audit. , 1999, Journal of accident & emergency medicine.

[21]  P. Maningas,et al.  The soterion rapid triage system: Evaluation of interrater reliability and validity , 2004 .

[22]  B J Skipper,et al.  Triage: limitations in predicting need for emergent care and hospital admission. , 1996, Annals of emergency medicine.

[23]  D. Eitel,et al.  Reliability and validity of a new five-level triage instrument. , 2000, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[24]  S. Loke,et al.  Evaluation of nurse-physician inter-observer agreement on triage categorization in the emergency department of a Taiwan medical center. , 2002, Chang Gung medical journal.

[25]  David L Schriger,et al.  Interobserver agreement in emergency department triage. , 2003, Annals of emergency medicine.

[26]  M. Murray,et al.  Implementation of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the Principality of Andorra: Can triage parameters serve as emergency department quality indicators? , 2003, CJEM.