• Michiel Schinkel, Lyfke Bergsma, Lars Ingmar Veldhuis, Milan L Ridderikhof, and Frits Holleman.
• Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands m.schinkel@amsterdamumc.nl.
• Emerg Med J. 2022 Sep 1; 39 (9): 691696691-696.

BackgroundEmergency triage systems are used globally to prioritise care based on patients' needs. These systems are commonly based on patient complaints, while the need for timely interventions on regular hospital wards is usually assessed with early warning scores (EWS). We aim to directly compare the ability of currently used triage scales and EWS scores to recognise patients in need of urgent care in the ED.MethodsWe performed a retrospective, single-centre study on all patients who presented to the ED of a Dutch Level 1 trauma centre, between 1 September 2018 and 24 June 2020 and for whom a Netherlands Triage System (NTS) score as well as a Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) was recorded. The performance of these scores was assessed using surrogate markers for true urgency and presented using bar charts, cross tables and a paired area under the curve (AUC).ResultsWe identified 12 317 unique patient visits where NTS and MEWS scores were documented during triage. A paired comparison of the AUC of these scores showed that the MEWS score had a significantly better AUC than the NTS for predicting the need for hospital admission (0.65 vs 0.60; p<0.001) or 30-day all-cause mortality (0.70 vs 0.60; p<0.001). Furthermore, when non-urgent MEWS scores co-occur with urgent NTS scores, the MEWS score seems to more accurately capture the urgency level that is warranted.ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that EWSs could potentially be used to replace the current emergency triage systems.© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

10 keywords...

hide…