The implication of a translational triage tool in mass casualty incidents: part three: a multinational study, using validated patient cards.

BACKGROUND: Mass casualty incidents (MCI) pose significant challenges to existing resources, entailing multiagency collaboration. Triage is a critical component in the management of MCIs, but the lack of a universally accepted triage system can hinder collaboration and lead to preventable loss of life. This multinational study uses validated patient cards (cases) based on real MCIs to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a novel Translational Triage Tool (TTT) in primary triage assessment of mass casualty victims. METHODS: Using established triage systems versus TTT, 163 participants (1575 times) triaged five patient cases. The outcomes were statistically compared. RESULTS: TTT demonstrated similar sensitivity to the Sieve primary triage method and higher sensitivity than the START primary triage system. However, the TTT algorithm had a lower specificity compared to Sieve and higher over-triage rates. Nevertheless, the TTT algorithm demonstrated several advantages due to its straightforward design, such as rapid assessment, without the need for additional instrumental interventions, enabling the engagement of non-medical personnel. CONCLUSIONS: The TTT algorithm is a promising and feasible primary triage tool for MCIs. The high number of over-triages potentially impacts resource allocation, but the absence of under-triages eliminates preventable deaths and enables the use of other personal resources. Further research involving larger participant samples, time efficiency assessments, and real-world scenarios is needed to fully assess the TTT algorithm's practicality and effectiveness in diverse multiagency and multinational contexts.

Developing a translational triage research tool: part two-evaluating the tool through a Delphi study among experts.

BACKGROUND: There are different prehospital triage systems, but no consensus on what constitutes the optimal choice. This heterogeneity constitutes a threat in a mass casualty incident in which triage is used during multiagency collaboration to prioritize casualties according to the injuries' severity. A previous study has confirmed the feasibility of using a Translational Triage Tool consisting of several steps which translate primary prehospital triage systems into one. This study aims to evaluate and verify the proposed algorithm using a panel of experts who in their careers have demonstrated proficiency in triage management through research, experience, education, and practice. METHOD: Several statements were obtained from earlier reports and were presented to the expert panel in two rounds of a Delphi study. RESULTS: There was a consensus in all provided statements, and for the first time, the panel of experts also proposed the manageable number of critical victims per healthcare provider appropriate for proper triage management. CONCLUSION: The feasibility of the proposed algorithm was confirmed by experts with some minor modifications. The utility of the translational triage tool needs to be evaluated using authentic patient cards used in simulation exercises before being used in actual triage scenarios.

A translational triage research development tool: standardizing prehospital triage decision-making systems in mass casualty incidents.

BACKGROUND: There is no global consensus on the use of prehospital triage system in mass casualty incidents. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the most commonly used pre-existing prehospital triage systems for the possibility of creating one universal translational triage tool. METHODS: The Rapid Evidence Review consisted of (1) a systematic literature review (2) merging and content analysis of the studies focusing on similarities and differences between systems and (3) development of a universal system. RESULTS: There were 17 triage systems described in 31 eligible articles out of 797 identified initially. Seven of the systems met the predesignated criteria and were selected for further analysis. The criteria from the final seven systems were compiled, translated and counted for in means of 1/7's. As a product, a universal system was created of the majority criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not create a new triage system itself but rather identifies the possibility to convert various prehospital triage systems into one by using a triage translational tool. Future research should examine the tool and its different decision-making steps either by using simulations or by experts' evaluation to ensure its feasibility in terms of speed, continuity, simplicity, sensitivity and specificity, before final evaluation at prehospital level.