Elderly patients often present to the emergency department (ED) with non-specific complaints. Previous studies indicate that such patients are at greater risk for life-threatening illnesses than similarly aged patients with specific complaints. We evaluated the diagnoses and outcomes of elderly patients presenting with non-specific complaints.

Two trained data abstractors independently reviewed all records of patients over 70 years old presenting (to two academic EDs) with non-specific complaints, as defined by the Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS). Outcomes of interest were ED discharge diagnosis, hospital admission, length of stay, and ED revisit within 30 days.

Of the 743 patients screened for the study, 265 were excluded because they had dizziness, vertigo, or a specific complaint recorded in the triage notes. 419 patients (87.7%) presented with weakness and 59 patients (12.3%) presented with general fatigue or unwellness. The most common diagnoses were urinary tract infection (UTI) (11.3%), transient ischemic attack (TIA) (10.0%), and dehydration (5.6%). There were 11 hospital admissions with median length of stay of five days. Eighty-one (16.9%) patients revisited the ED within 30 days of discharge. Regression analysis indicated that arrival to the ED by ambulance was independently associated with hospital admission.

Our results suggest that elderly patients presenting to the ED with non-specific complaints are not at high risk for life-threatening illnesses. The most common diagnoses are UTI, TIA, and dehydration. Most patients can be discharged safely, although a relatively high proportion revisit the ED within 30 days.

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.

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.

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.

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.

To derive and internally validate a clinical decision rule that will rule out major thoracic injury in adult blunt trauma patients, reducing the unnecessary use of chest computed tomographic (CT) scans.

Data were retrospectively obtained from a chart review of all trauma patients presenting to a Canadian tertiary trauma care centre from 2005 to 2008, with those from April 2006 to March 2007 being used for the validation phase. Patients were included if they had an Injury Severity Score > 12 and chest CT at admission or a documented major thoracic injury noted in the trauma database. Patients with penetrating injury, a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score ≤ 8, paralysis, or age < 16 years were excluded.

There were 434 patients in the derivation group and 180 in the validation group who met the inclusion criteria. Using recursive partitioning, five clinical variables were found to be particularly predictive of injury. When these variables were normal, no patients had a major thoracic injury (sensitivity 100% [95% CI 98.4–100], specificity 46.9% [95% CI 44.2–46.9], and negative likelihood ratio 0.00 [95% CI 0.00–0.04]). The five variables were oxygen saturation (< 95% on room air or < 98% on any supplemental oxygen), chest radiograph, respiratory rate ≥ 25, chest auscultation, and thoracic palpation (SCRAP). In the validation group, the same five variables had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 96.2–100%), a specificity of 44.7% (95% CI 39.5–44.7%), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.00 (95% CI 0.00–0.10).

In major blunt trauma with a GCS score > 8, the SCRAP variables have a 100% sensitivity for major thoracic injury in this retrospective study. These findings need to be prospectively validated prior to use in a clinical setting.