Abnormal vital signs are strong predictors for intensive care unit admission and in-hospital mortality in adults triaged in the emergency department - a prospective cohort study

Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Kai Henrik Wiborg Lange⁴  Kristian Antonsen⁴  Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm⁴  Freddy Lippert¹  Peter Anthony Berlac³  Jakob Lundager Forberg³  György Sölétormos²  Jakob Klim Danker⁴  Marlene Mauson Pankoke Lauritzen⁵  Charlotte Barfod⁴ 

[1] Emergency Medicine and Emergency Medical Services, Head Office, Capital Region of Denmark, Hillerød, Denmark;Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Hillerød Hospital, Hillerød, Denmark;Deparment of Emergency Medicine, Hillerød Hospital, Hillerød, Denmark;Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Hillerød Hospital, Hillerød, Denmark;Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark

关键词: Blood gas analysis;    Vital signs;    Database;    Emergency Department;    Triage;   

Others  :  826613
DOI  :  10.1186/1757-7241-20-28

 received in 2012-01-04, accepted in 2012-04-10,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Assessment and treatment of the acutely ill patient have improved by introducing systematic assessment and accelerated protocols for specific patient groups. Triage systems are widely used, but few studies have investigated the ability of the triage systems in predicting outcome in the unselected acute population. The aim of this study was to quantify the association between the main component of the Hillerød Acute Process Triage (HAPT) system and the outcome measures; Admission to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and in-hospital mortality, and to identify the vital signs, scored and categorized at admission, that are most strongly associated with the outcome measures.

Methods

The HAPT system is a minor modification of the Swedish Adaptive Process Triage (ADAPT) and ranks patients into five level colour-coded triage categories. Each patient is assigned a triage category for the two main descriptors; vital signs, T_vitals, and presenting complaint, T_complaint. The more urgent of the two determines the final triage category, T_final. We retrieved 6279 unique adult patients admitted through the Emergency Department (ED) from the Acute Admission Database. We performed regression analysis to evaluate the association between the covariates and the outcome measures.

Results

The covariates, T_vitals, T_complaint and T_final were all significantly associated with ICU admission and in-hospital mortality, the odds increasing with the urgency of the triage category. The vital signs best predicting in-hospital mortality were saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO₂), respiratory rate (RR), systolic blood pressure (BP) and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS). Not only the type, but also the number of abnormal vital signs, were predictive for adverse outcome. The presenting complaints associated with the highest in-hospital mortality were 'dyspnoea' (11.5%) and 'altered level of consciousness' (10.6%). More than half of the patients had a T_complaint more urgent than T_vitals, the opposite was true in just 6% of the patients.

Conclusion

The HAPT system is valid in terms of predicting in-hospital mortality and ICU admission in the adult acute population. Abnormal vital signs are strongly associated with adverse outcome, while including the presenting complaint in the triage model may result in over-triage.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Barfod et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Eitel DR, Rudkin SE, Malvehy MA, Killeen JP, Pines JM: Improving service quality by understanding emergency department flow: a White Paper and position statement prepared for the American Academy of Emergency Medicine. J Emerg Med 2010, 38(1):70-79.
• [2]Meek R, Phiri W: Australasian Triage Scale: Consumer perspective. Emerg Med Australas 2005, 17(3):212-217.
• [3]Manchester Triage group: Emergency triage: Manchester Triage Group. London: BMJ Publishing Group, London, UK; 1997.
• [4]Beveridge R, Clarke B, Janes N: Canadian emergency department triage and acuity scale; implementation guidelines. Can J Emerg Med 1999, 1:2-28.
• [5]Lethvall S: ADAPT - Adaptiv Processtraige/VITALHISTORIER. Version 1.1.2008. Giltiga 080424-090531 (Sweden)
• [6]Nordberg M, Lethvall S, Castrén M: The validity of the triage system ADAPT. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010, 18(Suppl 1):36. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Lauritzen M, Dahlin J, Skriver C: HAPT - Hilleroed Acute Process Triage. [http://www.hillerodhospital.dk/menu/Afdelinger/Akutafdelingen/Triage/] webcite 2011. Accessed august 24, 2011
• [8]Skriver C, Lauritzen MP, Forberg JL, Gaardboe-Poulsen OB, Mogensen CB, Hansen CL, et al.: Systematic process triage quickens the treatment of the most sick patients. Ugeskr Laeger 2011, 173(40):2490-2493.
• [9]Farrohknia N, Castren M, Ehrenberg A, Lind L, Oredsson S, Jonsson H, et al.: Emergency department triage scales and their components: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2011, 30(19):42.
• [10]Barfod C, Lauritzen MMP, Danker JK, Sölétörmos G, Forberg JL, Berlac PA, et al.: The formation and design of 'The Acute Admission Database' - a database including a prospective, observational cohort of 6279 patients triaged in the Emergency Department in a larger Danish hospital. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2012, in press.
• [11]von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al.: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Rev Esp Salud Publica 2008, 82(3):251-259.
• [12]Prytherch DR, Smith GB, Schmidt PE, Featherstone PI: ViEWS-Towards a national early warning score for detecting adult inpatient deterioration. Resuscitation 2010, 81(8):932-937.
• [13]Rhee KJ, Fisher CJ Jr, Willitis NH: The Rapid Acute Physiology Score. Am J Emerg Med 1987, 5(4):278-282.
• [14]Olsson T, Terent A, Lind L: Rapid Emergency Medicine score: a new prognostic tool for in-hospital mortality in nonsurgical emergency department patients. J Intern Med 2004, 255(5):579-587.
• [15]Widgren BR, Jourak M: Medical Emergency Triage and Treatment System (METTS): a new protocol in primary triage and secondary priority decision in emergency medicine. J Emerg Med 2011, 40(6):623-628.
• [16]Fitzgerald G, Jelinik G, Scott D, Gerdtz MF: Emergency department triage revisited. Emerg Med J 2010, 27:86-92.
• [17]Grafstein E, Bullard MJ, Warren D, Unger B, CTAS National Working Group: Revision of the Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS) Presenting Complaint List version 1.1. Can J Emerg Med 2008, 10(2):151-173.
• [18]Jorsboe H, Schroder M, Barylak M, Anderson P: Inter-observer variation in the triage-process. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010, 18:P16. BioMed Central Full Text