Medición del subtriaje como indicador de calidad y seguridad en un servicio de urgencias / Undertriage as quality of care parameter in an emergency department

Background: Undertriage or the underestimation of the urgency of the condition of a person arriving in an emergency department (ED) represents a measure of quality care. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of undertriage in a high complexity hospital of Argentina; to describe characteristics and mortality of these patients. Material and Methods: All consultations admitted to the ED during 2014 were analyzed. Those assigned to a lower level of admission risk (classified as Emergency Severity Index -ESI- 3 to 5) but required hospitalization in intensive care units (ICU) as the first hospitalization place were considered as an undertriage. A random sample of correctly categorized admissions (ESI 1 or 2), who were subsequently hospitalized in the ICU, was selected as a comparison group. Results: The global undertriage prevalence was 0.30% (316/104,832). Among patients admitted to the ICU, the prevalence was 21% (316/1,461; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 19-24). The 316 patients whose severity was underestimated had a median age of 73 years, and admitted between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. in a greater proportion. Overall hospital mortality was 8.9% (95% CI 6.78-11.38), and all deaths occurred after the patient was transferred from the emergency room. There were no differences in mortality between patients with correct triage or undertriage (11 and 7% respectively, p = 0.09). No differences were observed either in the total number of critical interventions during care in the first 24 hours. Significant differences were observed in requirements for mechanical ventilation (11 and 4% respectively, p = 0.01), orotracheal intubation (10 and 5% respectively p = 0.01) and non-invasive ventilation (8 and 4% respectively, p = 0.05). Conclusions: Undertriage rate in this series was low, but it can be improved.

Prevalencia de dolor y manejo en la central de emergencias / Prevalence of pain and management in emergency department

OBJETIVOS: Estimar prevalencia de dolor como motivo de consulta en la Central de Emergencias de Adultos (CEA). MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Corte transversal que incluyó consultas en la CEA del Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires entre 2016-2017. Se consideraron casos aquellos con dolor según subset terminológico en el motivo principal de la epicrisis. Se recolectaron variables desde bases de datos secundarias de alta calidad y a través de revisión manual. RESULTADOS: La prevalencia fue 52%(196/373) con IC95% 47-57%. Los pacientes eran 68% de sexo femenino, con edad media de 51 años, y la mayoría se asignaron a áreas de baja complejidad para su atención. Casi el 20% (38/196) recibió algún tratamiento analgésico siendo la vía de administración más frecuente intravenosa (52%). El registro inicial de dolor ocurrió sólo un 12% por enfermería y en 83% por médicos. CONCLUSIÓN: Se requiere mejorar el registro para garantizar valoración y manejo efectivo de dolor (AU)

OBJETIVE: To estimate pain prevalence as a reason for consultation at Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: Cross sectional with consultations admitted to ED of Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires between 2016-2017. Cases were defines as those with a terminological subset according to the main reason. Variables were collected from secondary databases of high quality and manual review. RESULTS: Prevalence was 52% (196/373) with 95%CI 47-57. Patients were 68% female, with a mean age of 51 years, and most were assigned to areas of low complexity for their attention. Almost 20% (38/196) received some analgesic treatment, being intravenous (52%) the most frequent route of administration. Initial recording of pain occurred only 12% by nurses and 83% by physicians. CONCLUSION: Registration is required to improve for ensure effective assessment and management of pain (AU)