Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Performance of First Aid Trained Staff using a Modified START Triage Tool at Achieving Appropriate Triage Compared to a Physiology-Based Triage Strategy at Australian Mass Gatherings

  • Ned Douglas (a1), Jacqueline Leverett (a1), Joseph Paul (a1), Mitchell Gibson (a1), Jessica Pritchard (a1), Kayla Brouwer (a1), Ebony Edwards (a1), James Carew (a1), Jake Donovan (a1), Elyssia Bourke (a1) and Erin Smith (a2)...

Abstract

Introduction:

Triage at mass gatherings in Australia is commonly performed by staff members with first aid training. There have been no evaluations of the performance of first aid staff with respect to diagnostic accuracy or identification of presentations requiring ambulance transport to hospital.

Hypothesis:

It was hypothesized that triage decisions by first aid staff would be considered correct in at least 61% of presentations.

Methods:

A retrospective audit of 1,048 presentations to a single supplier of event health care services in Australia was conducted. The presentations were assessed based on the first measured set of physiological parameters, and the primary triage decision was classified as “expected” if the primary and secondary triage classifications were the same or “not expected” if they differed. The performance of the two triage systems was compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis.

Results:

The expected decision was made by first aid staff in 674 (71%) of presentations. Under-triage occurred in 131 (14%) presentations and over-triage in 142 (15%) presentations. The primary triage strategy had an AUROC of 0.7644, while the secondary triage strategy had an AUROC of 0.6280, which was significantly different (P = .0199).

Conclusion:

The results support the continued use of first aid trained staff members in triage roles at Australian mass gatherings. Triage tools should be simple, and the addition of physiological variables to improve the sensitivity of triage tools is not recommended because such an approach does not improve the discriminatory capacity of the tools.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Correspondence: Ned Douglas, MB BS, BMedSci, FANZCA 1 Alexandra St Pascoe Vale, 3044, Victoria, Australia E-mail: ndouglas@emsa.com.au

References

Hide All
1.Born, CT, Briggs, SM, Ciraulo, DL, et al.Disasters and mass casualties: general principles of response and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(7):388396.
2.Bullock, M, Ranse, J, Hutton, A.Impact of patients presenting with alcohol and/or drug intoxication on in-event health care services at mass-gathering events: an integrative literature review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(5):539542.
3.Bazyar, J, Farrokhi, M, Khankeh, H.Triage systems in mass casualty incidents and disasters: a review study with a worldwide approach. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019;7(3):482494.
4.Ranse, J, Hutton, A, Keene, T, et al.Health service impact from mass gatherings: a systematic literature review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(1):7177.
5.Zachariasse, JM, Hagen, V van der, Seiger, N, Mackway-Jones, K, Veen, M van, Moll, HA.Performance of triage systems in emergency care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9(5):e026471.
6.Considine, J, LeVasseur, SA, Villanueva, E.The Australasian Triage Scale: examining emergency department nurses’ performance using computer and paper scenarios. Ann Emerg Med. 2004;44(5):516523.
7.Turris, SA, Lund, A.Triage during mass gatherings. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2012;27(6):531535.
8.Cannon, M, Roitman, R, Ranse, J, Morphet, J.Development of a mass gathering triage tool: an Australian perspective. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(S1):S140.
9.Heller, AR, Salvador, N, Frank, M, Schiffner, J, Kipke, R, Kleber, C.Diagnostic quality of triage algorithms for mass casualty incidents. Anaesthesist. 2017;66(10):762772.
10.Kahn, CA, Schultz, CH, Miller, KT, Anderson, CL.Does START triage work? An outcomes assessment after a disaster. Ann Emerg Med. 2009;54(3):424430, 430.e1.
11.Timbie, JW, Ringel, JS, Fox, DS, et al.Systematic review of strategies to manage and allocate scarce resources during mass casualty events. Ann Emerg Med. 2013;61(6):677–689.e101.
12.Goksuluk, D, Korkmaz, S, Zararsiz, G, Karaagaoglu, AE.EasyROC: an interactive web-tool for ROC curve analysis using R language environment. RJ. 2016;8(2):213230.
13.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Emergency Severity Index (ESI): A Triage Tool for Emergency Departments. Version 4. Rockville, Maryland USA: AHRQ. https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/systems/hospital/esi/index.html. Accessed June 2019.

Keywords

Performance of First Aid Trained Staff using a Modified START Triage Tool at Achieving Appropriate Triage Compared to a Physiology-Based Triage Strategy at Australian Mass Gatherings

  • Ned Douglas (a1), Jacqueline Leverett (a1), Joseph Paul (a1), Mitchell Gibson (a1), Jessica Pritchard (a1), Kayla Brouwer (a1), Ebony Edwards (a1), James Carew (a1), Jake Donovan (a1), Elyssia Bourke (a1) and Erin Smith (a2)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed