FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Care accessibility and reasons for non-urgent emergency department visits in South Tyrol (Italy): protocol of the multicentre cross-sectional CARES study

Por: Ausserhofer · D. · Zaboli · A. · Mahlknecht · A. · Plagg · B. · Barbieri · V. · Marino · P. · Piccoliori · G. · Engl · A. · Wiedermann · C. J.
Introduction

Emergency departments (EDs) suffer from crowding due to patients with low urgency whose treatment is often inappropriate in many cases. Crowding in the ED may indicate inefficiencies in the primary care infrastructure. According to the literature, it is associated with individual and system-related factors, such as younger age, convenience of visiting the ED and a negative perception of care outside the hospital. However, patients’ motives driving decision-making for non-urgent visits to the ED in this post-pandemic period require further exploration. Therefore, this study aims to describe the proportion of potentially avoidable, non-urgent ED visits and to explore the associations between socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, patients’ motives, and potentially avoidable, non-urgent visits to the ED.

Methods and analysis

This multicentre cross-sectional study will be conducted in the ED of seven public hospitals in the South Tyrolean Health Service in the northern Italian Province of Bolzano-Bozen. A consecutive sample of 1000 adult patients (≥18 years) with clinical conditions that are triaged as ‘non-urgent’ (ie, Manchester Triage System priority level ‘blue’ or ‘green’) and consent to participate in the study will be included. Data will be collected in each ED over two full working weeks (24 hours, weekdays and weekends) between 1 September 2024 and 30 November 2024. For each patient, triage nurses and medical doctors will fill out a data collection sheet, including the triage code, diagnosis at discharge and avoidability of the ED visit. Patients will be surveyed using a structured questionnaire with standardised instruments (eg, the Patient Activation Measure and Mental Health Inventory) and self-developed items (eg, motives for ED visits and previous use of community care services). Data analysis will involve descriptive and inferential analyses (ie, 2 tests) to determine group differences. Multivariate multilevel modelling will be applied to explore the associations between individual, system and cultural factors and potentially avoidable, non-urgent visits.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Medical Ethics Committee of the South Tyrolean Health Service (Nr. 41-2024). The results will be published in relevant scientific journals and communicated to the public and relevant institutions through dissemination activities, including press releases and stakeholder meetings. The findings will inform recommendations aimed at refining health policies and optimising access to primary and emergency care services.

Registration details

ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN17355506).

Comparing Safety and Accuracy of Standardised Versus Subjective Triage Code Assignment by Nurses: A Multicenter Observational Simulated Study

ABSTRACT

Background

Standardised triage systems have been in place for decades with minor modifications, while nurses' skills and knowledge have significantly advanced.

Aim

To determine whether nurses' clinical expertise outperforms triage systems in simulated clinical cases.

Design

A multicenter simulated observational study.

Methods

The study was conducted from January 1, 2024 to March 31, 2024, in four Italian emergency departments, enrolling triage-performing nurses. Thirty clinical cases, based on real patients representing daily emergency department influx, were reconstructed. The primary outcome was the agreement between the triage code assigned by the Manchester Triage System and the code assigned based on clinical expertise. The secondary outcome compared the predictive ability of the codes assigned by nurses regarding clinical outcomes, such as death within 72 h, the need for hospitalisation, and the need for life-saving intervention. The study was reported in accordance with the STROBE statement.

Results

Seventy-seven triage nurses completed the 30 vignettes. The agreement between the MTS-assigned code and the clinical expertise triage reported a Cohen's kappa of 0.576 (95% CI: 0.564–0.598). For death within 72 h, the clinical expertise code reported better results than the Manchester Triage System. For life-saving interventions, the Manchester Triage System reported a lower performance than clinical expertise. The variability in triage code assignment was higher for clinical expertise compared to the Manchester Triage System.

Conclusions

Triage codes assigned by nurses based on clinical expertise perform better in terms of clinical outcomes, suggesting a need to update triage systems to incorporate nurses' knowledge and skills. However, standardised triage systems should be maintained to reduce variability and ensure consistent patient classification.

Reporting Method

The study was conducted and reported according to the STROBE statement.

Patient or Public Contribution

No patient or public contribution.

❌