Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-19T16:42:06.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predictors of admission to hospital of patients triaged as nonurgent using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2015

Daren Lin  and
Andrew Worster
Daren Lin*
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON
Andrew Worster
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON
*
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, ONL8L 2X2; darenlin@gmail.com.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
Objectives:

To identify factors known prior to triage that might have predicted hospital admission for patients triaged by the Canadian Triage Acuity Scale (CTAS) as level 5 (CTAS 5, nonurgent) and to determine whether inappropriate triage occurred in the admitted CTAS 5 patients.

Methods:

We reviewed the triage records of patients triaged as CTAS 5 at the emergency departments (EDs) of three tertiary care hospitals between April 2002 and September 2009. Two triage nurses unaware of the study objective independently assigned the CTAS level in 20% of randomly selected CTAS 5 patients who were admitted. We used the kappa statistic (κ) to measure the agreement among the raters in CTAS level between the assessment of the research nurses and the original triage assessment and regression analysis to identify independent predictors of admission to hospital.

Results:

Of the 37,416 CTAS 5 patients included in this study, 587 (1.6%) were admitted. Agreement on CTAS assignment in CTAS 5 patients who were admitted was κ −0.9, (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.96 to 20.84). Age over 65 (odds ratio [OR] 5.46, 95% CI 4.57 to 6.53) and arrival by ambulance (OR 7.42, 95% CI 6.15 to 8.96) predicted hospital admission in CTAS 5 patients.

Conclusions:

Most of the CTAS 5 patients who were subsequently admitted to hospital may have qualified for a higher triage category. Two potential modifiers, age over 65 and arrival by ambulance, may have improved the prediction of admission in CTAS 5 patients. However, the consistent application of existing CTAS criteria may also be important to prevent incorrect triage.

Keywords

admissionCanadian Triage and Acuity Scaleinterrater reliability

Information

Type
Original Research • Recherche originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 15 , Issue 6 , November 2013 , pp. 353 - 358
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2013

References

REFERENCES

1. Manos, D, Petrie, DA, Beveridge, RC, et al. Inter-observer agreement using the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale. CJEM 2002;4:16–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Bullard, MJ, Unger, B, Spence, J, et al. Revisions to the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) adult guidelines. CJEM 2008;10:136–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Beveridge, R, Clarke, B, Janes, L, et al. Canadian emergency department triage and acuity scale: implementation guidelines. CJEM 1999;1(3 Suppl):S2–32.Google Scholar
4. Jiménez, JG, Murray, MJ, Beveridge, R, 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? CJEM 2003;5:315–22.Google Scholar
5. Worster, A, Fernandes, CM, Eva, K, et al. Predictive validity comparison of two five-level triage acuity scales. Eur J Emerg Med 2007;14:188–92, doi:10.1097/MEJ.0b013e3280adc956.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Lee, JY, Oh, SH, Peck, EH, et al. The validity of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale in predicting resource utilization and the need for immediate life-saving interventions in the elderly emergency department patients. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2011;19:68, doi:10.1186/1757-7241-19-68.Google Scholar
7. Atzema, CL, Austin, PC, Tu, JV, et al. Emergency department triage of acute myocardial infarction patients and the effect on outcomes. Ann Emerg Med 2009;53:736–45, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.11.011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Derlet, RW, Kinser, D, Ray, L, et al. Prospective identification and triage of nonemergency patients out of an emergency department: a 5-year study. Ann Emerg Med 1995;25:215–23, doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(95)70327-6.Google Scholar
9. Vertesi, L. Does the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale identify non-urgent patients who can be triaged away from the emergency department? CJEM 2004;6:337–42.Google Scholar
10. Gilbert, EH, Lowenstein, SR, Kozoil-McLain, J, et al. Chart reviews in emergency medicine research: where are the methods? Ann Emerg Med 1996;27:305–8, doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(96)70264-0.Google Scholar
11. Altman, D. Practical statistics for medical research. London (UK): Chapman and Hall; 1991.Google Scholar
12. Grafstein, E, Innes, G, Westman, J, et al. Inter-rater reliability of a computerized presenting-complaint-linked triage system in an urban emergency department. CJEM 2003;5:323.Google Scholar
13. Dong, SL, Bullard, MJ, Meurer, DO, et al. Reliability of computerized emergency triage. Acad Emerg Med 2006;13:269–75, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2006.tb01691.x.Google Scholar
14. Gravel, J, Gouin, S, Bailey, B, et al. Reliability of a computerized version of the Pediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14:864–9, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.tb02319.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Dallaire, C, Poitras, J, Aubin, K, et al. Emergency department triage: do experienced nurses agree on triage scores? J Emerg Med 2012;42:736–40.Google Scholar
16. Juurlink, DN, Detsky, AS. Kappa statistic. CMAJ 2005;173:16.Google Scholar
17. Gregoratos, G. Clinical manifestations of acute myocardial infarction in older patients. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 2001;10:345–7, doi:10.1111/j.1076-7460.2001.00641.x.Google Scholar
18. Shah, MN, Bazarian, JJ, Lerner, EB, et al. The epidemiology of emergency medical services use by older adults: an analysis of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14:441–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Sun, Y, Heng, BH, Tay, SY, et al. Predicting hospital admissions at emergency department triage using routine administrative data. Acad Emerg Med 2011;18:844–50, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01125.x.Google Scholar