...
首页> 外文期刊>Academic Emergency Medicine >Accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index Triage Instrument for Identifying Elder Emergency Department Patients Receiving an Immediate Life-saving Intervention
【24h】

Accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index Triage Instrument for Identifying Elder Emergency Department Patients Receiving an Immediate Life-saving Intervention

机译:紧急程度指数分类检查仪器的准确性,用于识别急诊急诊的老年急诊科患者

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objectives: The study objective was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage instrument for the identification of elder patients receiving an immediate life-saving intervention in the emergency department (ED).Methods: The authors reviewed medical records for consecutive patients 65 years or older who presented to a single academic ED serving a large community of elders during a 1-month period. ESI triage scores were compared to actual ED course with attention to the occurrence of an immediate life-saving intervention. The sensitivity and specificity of an ESI triage level of 1 for the identification of patients receiving an immediate intervention was calculated. For 50 cases, the triage nurse ESI designation was compared to the triage level determined by an expert triage nurse based on retrospective record review.Results: Of 782 consecutive patients 65 years or older who presented to the ED, 18 (2%) had an ESI level of 1, 176 (23%) had an ESI level of 2, 461 (60%) had an ESI level of 3, 100 (13%) had an ESI level of 4, and 18 (2%) had an ESI level of 5. Twenty-six patients received an immediate life-saving intervention. ESI triage scores for these 26 individuals were as follows: ESI 1, 11 patients; ESI 2, nine patients; and ESI 3, six patients. The sensitivity of ESI to identify patients receiving an immediate intervention was 42.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.3% to 61.3%); the specificity was 99.2% (95% CI = 98.0% to 99.7%). For 17 of 50 cases in which actual triage nurse and expert nurse ESI levels disagreed, undertriage by the triage nurses was more common than overtriage (13 vs. 4 patients).Conclusions: The ESI triage instrument identified fewer than half of elder patients receiving an immediate life-saving intervention. Failure to follow established ESI guidelines in the triage of elder patients may contribute to apparent undertriage.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:238–243 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
机译:目的:本研究的目的是确定紧急程度指数(ESI)分类法仪器的敏感性和特异性,以鉴定在急诊科(ED)立即接受挽救生命干预的老年患者。方法:作者审查了病历适用于连续65岁以上的患者,他们在1个月内就诊于一个为大型老年人社区服务的学术ED。将ESI分流得分与实际的ED课程进行比较,并注意立即进行的挽救生命的干预措施。计算了ESI分类级别1对识别立即接受干预的患者的敏感性和特异性。对于50例病例,将分诊护士的ESI名称与专家分诊护士根据回顾性记录审查确定的分诊水平进行比较。结果:在782名65岁以上的连续患者中,有18名(2%)接受了ESI检查。 ESI等级1,176(23%)的ESI等级2,2,461(60%)的ESI等级3,100(13%)的ESI等级4,以及18(2%)的ESI级别为5。26位患者接受了立即的挽救生命的干预。这26个人的ESI分诊评分如下:ESI 1,11例; ESI 2,九名患者;和ESI 3,六个病人。 ESI识别接受立即干预的患者的敏感性为42.3%(95%置信区间[CI] = 23.3%至61.3%);特异性为99.2%(95%CI = 98.0%至99.7%)。在实际分诊护士和专家护士的ESI水平不一致的50例病例中,分诊护士的未分诊比过度分诊更为常见(13例与4例患者)。结论:ESI分诊工具发现接受分诊护士的老年患者不到一半立即进行救生干预。在老年患者的分诊中,如果未遵循既定的ESI指南,可能会导致明显的分期不足。ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:238–243©2010学术急诊医学学会

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