RESUMEN
Emergency triage is a short-duration, high-volume process so small reductions in the time taken to triage one patient can have large repercussions on the total amount of triage time. At the emergency department of a large inner-city hospital, an efficiency and quality improvement project was undertaken to reduce the time taken to safely triage patients and optimise the use of triage nurses' time. The project involved removing processes that did not contribute to the primary aim of triage, supporting individual triage nurses to improve their performance where needed, and optimising the triage process. A 44% reduction in mean triage episode time was seen, equating to 18,000 minutes of triage nurses' time saved every month. This near doubling of triage capacity was associated with an improvement in triage accuracy. The article describes the project, which used lean management principles and statistical process control methods, and discusses its implications for emergency triage.
RESUMEN
A shortcut review was carried out to investigate whether avulsion fractures of the base of the fifth metatarsal were best treated with tubular bandage, a walking boot or a short leg plaster cast. One paper presented the only evidence to answer one of the clinical questions (plaster cast or walking boot) but no evidence was found comparing tubular bandage and a walking boot. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of this paper are tabulated. It is concluded that while the only evidence available shows marginal benefit of walking boot over short plaster cast during recovery, there is no benefit to final outcome. Further research comparing tubular bandage and walking boot is required.
Asunto(s)
Vendajes , Moldes Quirúrgicos , Ortesis del Pié , Fracturas por Avulsión/terapia , Huesos Metatarsianos/lesiones , Medicina de Emergencia Basada en la Evidencia , HumanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate and collate the opinions of experts regarding the triage of patients in mental health crisis presenting to EDs. DESIGN: A three-round e-Delphi study was conducted between November 2017 and April 2018. The panel of 28 representative experts were drawn from six stakeholder groups. 23 of the panel were clinicians working in England, while 5 were international triage experts. RESULTS: Experts generated 173 statements in six topic areas in the first round. 32 of these statements reached consensus in round 2. A further 20 statements reached consensus in round 3, leaving 121 statements that did not reach consensus. The consensus statements were used to develop a structured five-level triage tool where the highest level of priority was assigned to patients exhibiting extreme aggression or agitation, those requiring restraint, those at immediate risk of leaving before assessment and those who presented a high risk of self-harm or harm to others. At lower triage priorities, other factors, such as items of psychiatric history, collateral history, observations and judgements, have been identified. CONCLUSIONS: A broadly based, multispecialty, multiprofessional expert Delphi panel has reached consensus on 52 statements concerning the triage of patients presenting in mental health crisis to EDs. The triage tool derived from this work can be used to inform the design of triage instruments employed to prioritise patients with physical and mental health problems equitably.