The effect of triage team on time-in-department in a pediatric emergency department

Objective. To determine whether the use of a triage team would reduce the average time-in-department in a pediatric emergency department by 25%.^ Methods. A triage team consisting of a physician, a nurse, and a nurse's assistant initiated work-ups and saw patients who required minimal lab work-up and were likely to be discharged. Study days were randomized. Our inclusion criteria were all children seen in the emergency center between 6p and 2a Monday-Friday. Our exclusion criteria included resuscitations, inpatient-inpatient transfers, left without being seen, leaving against medical advice, any child seen outside of 6p-2am Monday-Friday and on the weekends. A Pearson-Chi square was used for comparison of the two groups for heterogeneity. For the time-in-department analysis, we performed a 2 sided t-test with a set alpha of 0.05 using Mann Whitney U looking for differences in time-in-department based on acuity level, disposition, and acuity level stratified by disposition. ^ Results. Among urgent and non-urgent patients, we found a statistically significant decrease in time-in-department in a pediatric emergency department. Urgent patients had a time-in-department that was 51 minutes shorter than patients seen on non-triage team days (p=0.007), which represents a 14% decrease in time-in-department. Non-urgent patients seen on triage team days had a time-in-department that was 24 minutes shorter than non-urgent patients seen on non-triage team days (p=0.009). From the disposition perspective, discharged patients seen on triage team days had a shorter time-in-department of 28 minutes as compared to those seen on non-triage team days (p=0.012). ^ Conclusion. Overall, there was a trend towards decreased time-in-department of 19 minutes (5.9% decrease) during triage team times. There was a statistically significant decrease in the time-in-department among urgent patients of 51 minutes (13.9% decrease) and among discharged patients of 28 minutes (8.4% decrease). Urgent care patients make up nearly a quarter of the emergency patient population and decreasing their time-in-department would likely make a significant impact on overall emergency flow.^

Body image rating scales to assess obesity

Obesity prevalence in the U.S. has increased during the last three decades with major impact on public health. Screening for obesity in a population with unknown weight status can be time- and resource-consuming, but the information is valuable for prioritizing and allocating scarce resources. The challenge remains to properly assess obesity with the available methods. Body Image Rating Scales (BIRS) have initially been developed to assess body image disturbances, but also seem useful as an alternative method in assessing obesity prevalence. Several different BIRS exists. In this project I reviewed the literature that exists regarding the use of BIRS, and its advantages and limitations for the assessment of obesity status with regards to BMI. The result yielded nine publications that examined eight different scales and their correlation with BMI, ranging from r=.59 for self-reported BMI to r=.94 for measured BMI. One concern is the lack of standardization of this method to assess obesity, given the range of different scales. While many methods for obesity assessment are available, the simplicity, ease of use and cost-effectiveness of BIRS make it very appealing. BIRS remain a potentially attractive option to assess the weight status of a large population with minimal requirements in assets and time, especially in situations where measuring instruments are not available, or when height or weight could not be recalled.^