Comparación de parámetros de atención en una escala de triage de 5 niveles con los parámetros estándar


Autoria(s): Vargas Rodríguez, Grace Nathaly; Vargas Varela, Manuel Fernando
Contribuinte(s)

Menendez Ramírez, Salvador Eduardo

Data(s)

07/07/2015

Resumo

Introducción: La escala de severidad en emergencias es una herramienta que ofrece seguridad a pacientes en servicios de urgencias. Este trabajo evalúa la aplicación de la escala ESI 4.0 en términos de oportunidad de atención y consumo de recursos en la Fundación Santa Fé de Bogotá, para comparar los resultados con parámetros estándar. Metodología Estudio observacional analítico de corte transversal. Se incluyeron 385 pacientes aleatorizados por nivel de atención. Se tomaron datos demográficos y variables como consumo de recursos y destino del paciente para su descripción y análisis. Resultados: El promedio de edad fue 44.9 años IC95%42.9–46.9, el 54.5% fueron mujeres. Se encontró un tiempo promedio de espera para nivel 1 de 1.39 min, para el nivel 2 de 22.9 min 2, para el nivel 3 de 41.9 min, para el nivel 4 de 56.9 min y para el nivel 5 de 52.1 min. El tiempo promedio de estancia en urgencias fue 5.9 horas y el 78.9% consumió recursos. Al comparar los tiempos con estándares mundiales en el nivel 1, 2 y 3 son significativamente mayores (P<0,05), en el nivel 4 es similar (p0,51) y en el nivel 5 es significativamente menor (p=0,00) Discusión: La escala ESI 4.0 es una herramienta segura, con un comportamiento similar en oportunidad de atención y consumo de recursos con respecto a los estándares de cuidado en los servicios de urgencias.

Introduction: Emergency Severity Index 4.0 (ESI) is a triage tool that offers a good safety scope for patients in Emergency departments. Our aim is to evaluate the application of the ESI score in Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá emergency department, in terms of time of attention and, resource consumption compare these results with actual standard parameters. Methodology: Observational analytical cross-sectional study 385 randomized patients were included according level of triage. Data on demographics, number of resources needed and destination were collected and analyzed. Results: An average of age was 44.9 IC95%42.9 – 46.9, 54.5% were women. We found an average waiting time of 1.39 min for level 1, 22.9 min for level 2, 41.9 min for level 3, and 56.9 min for level 4 y 52.1 min for level 5. Visit time was 5.9 hours and 78.9% of consults needed resources. Comparing waiting times with standards, time of attention since assignation level was measured and compared with standards and found for the level 1,2 and 3 significant higher levels (p<0,05), for level 4 is similar (p0,51) y for level 5 is significantly lower (p=0,00) Discussion: Emergency Severity Index 4.0 (ESI), has a similar behavior in terms of waiting times and resources consumption compared with literature reports and according to care standards worldwide.

Formato

application/pdf

Identificador

http://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/10653

Idioma(s)

spa

Publicador

Facultad de Medicina

Direitos

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Fonte

instname:Universidad del Rosario

reponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR

1. Iserson, K. Triage in Medicine, Part I: Concept, History, and Types Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:275-281

2. Funderburke, P. Exploring Best Practice For Triage J Emerg Nurs 2008;34:180-2.

3. Fernandes C, Tanabe P, Et al. Five-Level Triage: A Report from the ACEP/ENA Five-Level Triage Task Force. J Emerg Nurs 2005;1: 31-1

4. Travers D. et al. Five-Level Triage System More Effective Than Three-Level in Tertiary Emergency Department. J Emerg Nurs. 2002; 28: 395 - 401

5. Wuerz D. Et al. Implementation and Refinement of the Emergency Severity Index. Acad Emerg Med 2001; 8: 170 - 177

6. Blagg CR. Triage: Napoleon to the present day. J Nephrol. 2004; 17:629-632.

7. Mitchell, G. A Brief History of Triage. Disaster Med and Pub Health Prep 2008: vol 2 suppl 1.

8. Iserson, K. Triage in Medicine, Part II: Underlying Values and Principles Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:282-287

9. Maryland Triage System Training Program Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems 2009

10. Veatch RM. Disaster preparedness and triage: justice and the common good. Mt Sinai J Med. 2005;72:236-241

11. Wuerz, D Et al. Reliability and Validity of a New Five-level Triage Instrument. Acad Emerg Med. 2000;7: 236 - 243

12. Cooke, M. Does the Manchester triage system detect the critically ill? J Acad Emerg Med 1999;16:179-18

Baumann M, Strout T, Triage of Geriatric Patients in the Emergency Department: Validity and Survival With Emergency Severity Index. Ann Emerg Med 2007;49: 1-7

14. Gilboy N, et al. Emergency Severity Index (ESI): A Triage Tool for Emergency Department Care, Version 4. Implementation Handbook 2012 Edition. AHRQ Publication No 12-0014. Rockville, MD. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

15. Ministerio de la Protección Social Decreto Número 4747 Diciembre 7 de 2007

16. Storm, M, Comparison of an Informally Structured Triage System, the Emergency Severity Index, and the Manchester Triage System to Distinguish Patient Priority in the Emergency Department Acad Emerg Med 2011; 18:822–829

17. Beveridge R, Clark B, Janes L, et al. Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale: implementation guidelines. CJEM 1999; 1(suppl): S2-28.

18. Gayoso Diaz; P. Lectura crítica de un artículo sobre diagnóstico. Guías Clínicas 2008; 8 Supl 1: 1

19. Travers D. et al. Five-Level Triage System More Effective Than Three-Level in Tertiary Emergency Department. J Emerg Nurs 2002; 28: 395 - 401

20. Implementing wait-time reductions under Ontario government benchmarks (Pay-for Results): A Cluster Randomized Trial of the Effect of a Physician-Nurse Triage Assistance team (MDRNSTAT) on emergency department patient wait times BMC Emergency Medicine 2013, 13:17

21. Horwitz LI, Green J, Bradley EH. US emergency department performance in wait time and length of visit. Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 55(2): 133-41

22. Welch SJ, Asplin BR, Stone-Griffith S, et al. Emergency department operational metrics, measures and definitions: Results of the second Performance Measures and Benchmarking Summit. Ann Emerg Med. 2011; 58. 1:33-40.

23. Publishing Wait Times for Emergency Department Care. An Information Paper. Developed by Members of the Emergency Medicine Practice Committee June 2012

24. Mason, S. Optimising triage, waiting times and service delivery in busy emergency departmens. University of Sheffield. Disponible en http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/sites/files

25. WA public Hospital Activity. Government of Western Australia. Información disponible en http://www.health.wa.gov.au/emergencyactivity/daily/triage.cfm

26. Bolk, M . van Rijswijck, BT. Validation of the Emergency Severity INdex in Self-referred Patients in a European Emergency department. Ann Emerg med 2006; 48-4 201-208

27. Friedman, R. The use and satisfaction with the Emergency Severity Index. J Emerg Nurs 2012; 28, 120-126

28. Niska R1, Bhuiya F, Xu J.National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2007 emergency department summary, Natl Health Stat Report. 2010 Aug 6;(26):1-31

TEME

Palavras-Chave #616.025 #Urgencias médicas - Cali (Colombia) #Índice de severidad de la enfermedad #Organización y administración #Triaje - clasificación #Triage #Scale #Severity #Time #Resources #Emergency
Tipo

info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis

info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion