...
首页> 外文期刊>Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine >Interrater agreement of Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale scores assigned by base hospital and emergency department nurses
【24h】

Interrater agreement of Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale scores assigned by base hospital and emergency department nurses

机译:基层医院和急诊科护士分配的加拿大急诊科分诊和敏锐度量表评分的内部评估者协议

获取原文
           

摘要

Objective:We sought to assess the applicability of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the prehospital setting by comparing CTAS scores assigned during ambulance transportation by base hospital (BH) nurses with CTAS scores given by emergency department (ED) nurses on patients' arrival.Methods:We recruited a prospective sample of consecutive patients who were transported to the ED by ambulance between December 2006 and March 2007 for whom a contact was made with the BH. Patients were triaged by the BH nurse with online communication and vital signs transmission. On arrival, patients were blindly triaged again by the ED nurse. We used the quadratic weighted κ statistic to measure the agreement between the 2 CTAS scores.Results:Ninety-four patients were triaged twice by 2 nursing teams (9 nurses at the BH and 39 nurses in the ED). The agreement obtained on prehospital and ED CTAS scores was moderate (κ = 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.37–0.63).Conclusion:The moderate interrater agreement we obtained may be a result of the changing conditions of patients during transport or may indicate that CTAS scoring requires direct contact to produce reliable triage scores. Our study casts a serious doubt on the appropriateness of BH nurses performing triage with CTAS in the prehospital setting.
机译:目的:我们试图通过比较基础医院(BH)护士在救护车运输过程中分配的CTAS得分与急诊科(ED)护士给出的CTAS得分,评估加拿大急诊部门分类和敏锐度量表(CTAS)在院前环境中的适用性。方法:我们收集了2006年12月至2007年3月之间由救护车运送到急诊室的连续患者的前瞻性样本,并与他们进行了接触。 BH护士对患者进行了分类,并进行了在线交流和生命体征传递。到达后,急诊室护士再次对患者进行盲目分类。我们使用二次加权κ统计量来衡量2个CTAS评分之间的一致性。结果:94例患者由2个护理小组(BH的9名护士和ED的39名护士)两次分诊。院前和ED CTAS评分的一致性为中等(κ= 0.50; 95%置信区间为0.37–0.63)。结论:我们获得的中等度间协议可能是患者在运输过程中情况变化的结果,或可能表明CTAS评分需要直接联系才能产生可​​靠的分类评分。我们的研究对在院前环境中使用CTAS进行分诊的BH护士是否合适提出了严重怀疑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号