How reliable is emergency department triage?

STUDY OBJECTIVE To measure interrater and intrarater agreement for an emergency department triage system. METHODS A 2-phase experimental study was conducted using previously described in-person scripted encounters with emergency nurses who perform patient triage and attending emergency physicians at a tertiary referral center. Standardized patient scenarios were presented twice over 6 weeks. Participants rated severity for each patient using a 5-tier triage system (nurses only) and estimated the probability of hospital admission, the most appropriate time frame to physician evaluation (5 choices, from "Immediate" to "More than 24 hours"), the need for a monitored ED bed, and the need for diagnostic services. Interrater agreement was measured by a coefficient of agreement for multiple raters and multiple categories. RESULTS Of the 37 participants (fewer than 90% of those eligible), 19 (51%) completed both phases (12 nurses, 7 physicians). Four (33%) of the nurses assigned the same severity ratings for the 5 cases in phase 2 as they did in phase 1. Intrarater agreement among the 12 nurses rating triage severity was.757. Interrater agreement of nurses and physicians was substantial regarding need for ED monitoring, and moderate to substantial for other triage assessments. CONCLUSION There was general agreement in interrater assessment of triage classification. Continued work is necessary to more fully delineate areas of variation.

[1]  J. Christenson,et al.  Use of continuous quality improvement to facilitate patient flow through the triage and fast-track areas of an emergency department. , 1995, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[2]  A. Birnbaum,et al.  Failure to validate a predictive model for refusal of care to emergency-department patients. , 2008, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[3]  J. Gill,et al.  Nonurgent use of the emergency department: appropriate or not? , 1994, Annals of emergency medicine.

[4]  J. Christenson,et al.  Continuous quality improvement reduces length of stay for fast-track patients in an emergency department. , 1996, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

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

[6]  S. Grover,et al.  Use of the emergency department for nonurgent care during regular business hours. , 1996, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[7]  I. Stiell,et al.  Interobserver agreement in the examination of acute ankle injury patients. , 1992, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[8]  R. Derlet,et al.  Refusing care to patients who present to an emergency department. , 1989, Annals of emergency medicine.

[9]  J. R. Landis,et al.  A one-way components of variance model for categorical data , 1977 .

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

[11]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Measuring Agreement for Multinomial Data , 1982 .

[12]  S. Read,et al.  Evaluation of nurse triage in a British accident and emergency department. , 1992, BMJ.

[13]  K. Grumbach,et al.  Refusing care to emergency department of patients: evaluation of published triage guidelines. , 1994, Annals of emergency medicine.

[14]  R. Derlet,et al.  Prospective identification and triage of nonemergency patients out of an emergency department: a 5-year study. , 1995, Annals of emergency medicine.

[15]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.