Manchester Triage System in Paediatric Emergency Care: Prospective Observational Study

Overview

Journal BMJ

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2008 Sep 24

PMID 18809587

Citations 49

Authors

M van Veen

Ewout W Steyerberg

Madelon Ruige

Alfred H J van Meurs

Jolt Roukema

Johan van der Lei

Henriette A Moll

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To validate use of the Manchester triage system in paediatric emergency care.

Design: Prospective observational study.

Setting: Emergency departments of a university hospital and a teaching hospital in the Netherlands, 2006-7.

Participants: 17,600 children (aged <16) visiting an emergency department over 13 months (university hospital) and seven months (teaching hospital).

Intervention: Nurses triaged 16,735/17,600 patients (95%) using a computerised Manchester triage system, which calculated urgency levels from the selection of discriminators embedded in flowcharts for presenting problems. Nurses over-ruled the urgency level in 1714 (10%) children, who were excluded from analysis. Complete data for the reference standard were unavailable in 1467 (9%) children leaving 13,554 patients for analysis.

Main Outcome Measures: Urgency according to the Manchester triage system compared with a predefined and independently assessed reference standard for five urgency levels. This reference standard was based on a combination of vital signs at presentation, potentially life threatening conditions, diagnostic resources, therapeutic interventions, and follow-up. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios for high urgency (immediate and very urgent) and 95% confidence intervals for subgroups based on age, use of flowcharts, and discriminators.

Results: The Manchester urgency level agreed with the reference standard in 4582 of 13,554 (34%) children; 7311 (54%) were over-triaged and 1661 (12%) under-triaged. The likelihood ratio was 3.0 (95% confidence interval 2.8 to 3.2) for high urgency and 0.5 (0.4 to 0.5) for low urgency; though the likelihood ratios were lower for those presenting with a medical problem (2.3 (2.2 to 2.5) v 12.0 (7.8 to 18.0) for trauma) and in younger children (2.4 (1.9 to 2.9) at 0-2 months [corrected] v 5.4 (4.5 to 6.5) at 8-16 years).

Conclusions: The Manchester triage system has moderate validity in paediatric emergency care. It errs on the safe side, with much more over-triage than under-triage compared with an independent reference standard for urgency. Triage of patients with a medical problem or in younger children is particularly difficult.

Citing Articles

Epidemiological trends of febrile infants presenting to the Paediatric Emergency department, in a tertiary care hospital, Karachi, Pakistan: a retrospective review.

Bushra Q, Fatima S, Hameed A, Mukhtar S BMJ Open. 2024; 14(8):e076611.

PMID: 39181554 PMC: 11344527. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076611.

Clinical support system for triage based on federated learning for the Korea triage and acuity scale.

Chang H, Yu J, Lee G, Heo S, Lee S, Hwang S Heliyon. 2023; 9(8):e19210.

PMID: 37654468 PMC: 10465866. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19210.

Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Tomography and Whole-Body Computed Tomography in Pediatric Polytrauma Diagnostics-A Retrospective Long-Term Two-Center Study.

Raimann M, Ludwig J, Heumann P, Rechenberg U, Goelz L, Mutze S Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(7).

PMID: 37046436 PMC: 10093446. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13071218.

Development of outcomes for evaluating emergency care triage: a Delphi approach.

Johansson A, Ekwall A, Forberg J, Ekelund U Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2023; 31(1):10.

PMID: 36841783 PMC: 9958312. DOI: 10.1186/s13049-023-01073-1.

Validity of the Paediatric Canadian Triage Acuity Scale in a Tertiary Hospital: An Analysis of Severity Markers' Variability.

Viana J, Braganca R, Santos J, Alves A, Santos A, Freitas A J Med Syst. 2023; 47(1):16.

PMID: 36710304 PMC: 9884652. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-023-01913-8.

References

Trautner B, Caviness A, Gerlacher G, Demmler G, Macias C . Prospective evaluation of the risk of serious bacterial infection in children who present to the emergency department with hyperpyrexia (temperature of 106 degrees F or higher). Pediatrics. 2006; 118(1):34-40. PMC: 2077849. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-2823. View

Windle J, Mackway-Jones K . Don't throw triage out with the bathwater. Emerg Med J. 2003; 20(2):119-20. PMC: 1726050. DOI: 10.1136/emj.20.2.119. View

Maningas P, Hime D, Parker D . The use of the Soterion Rapid Triage System in children presenting to the Emergency Department. J Emerg Med. 2006; 31(4):353-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2006.01.011. View

Cooper R . Emergency department triage: why we need a research agenda. Ann Emerg Med. 2004; 44(5):524-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.07.432. View

Bergeron S, Gouin S, Bailey B, Amre D, Patel H . Agreement among pediatric health care professionals with the pediatric Canadian triage and acuity scale guidelines. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2004; 20(8):514-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.pec.0000136067.07081.ae. View

Maldonado T, Avner J . Triage of the pediatric patient in the emergency department: are we all in agreement?. Pediatrics. 2004; 114(2):356-60. DOI: 10.1542/peds.114.2.356. View

Speake D, Teece S, Mackway-Jones K . Detecting high-risk patients with chest pain. Emerg Nurse. 2003; 11(5):19-21. DOI: 10.7748/en2003.09.11.5.19.c1131. View

Cooke M, Jinks S . Does the Manchester triage system detect the critically ill?. J Accid Emerg Med. 1999; 16(3):179-81. PMC: 1343329. DOI: 10.1136/emj.16.3.179. View

Roukema J, Steyerberg E, Van Meurs A, Ruige M, van der Lei J, Moll H . Validity of the Manchester Triage System in paediatric emergency care. Emerg Med J. 2006; 23(12):906-10. PMC: 2564249. DOI: 10.1136/emj.2006.038877. View

10.

Jimenez J, Murray M, Beveridge R, Pons J, Cortes E, Garrigos J . Implementation of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the Principality of Andorra: Can triage parameters serve as emergency department quality indicators?. CJEM. 2007; 5(5):315-22. View

11.

Gravel J, Gouin S, Bailey B, Roy M, Bergeron S, Amre D . Reliability of a computerized version of the Pediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale. Acad Emerg Med. 2007; 14(10):864-9. DOI: 10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.018. View

12.

Gorelick M, Lee C, Cronan K, Kost S, Palmer K . Pediatric emergency assessment tool (PEAT): a risk-adjustment measure for pediatric emergency patients. Acad Emerg Med. 2001; 8(2):156-62. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01281.x. View

13.

Pollack M, Patel K, Ruttimann U . PRISM III: an updated Pediatric Risk of Mortality score. Crit Care Med. 1996; 24(5):743-52. DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199605000-00004. View

14.

van der Wulp I, van Baar M, Schrijvers A . Reliability and validity of the Manchester Triage System in a general emergency department patient population in the Netherlands: results of a simulation study. Emerg Med J. 2008; 25(7):431-4. DOI: 10.1136/emj.2007.055228. View

15.

Gilboy N, Tanabe P, Travers D . The Emergency Severity Index Version 4: changes to ESI level 1 and pediatric fever criteria. J Emerg Nurs. 2005; 31(4):357-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jen.2005.05.011. View

16.

Gouin S, Gravel J, Amre D, Bergeron S . Evaluation of the Paediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale in a pediatric ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2005; 23(3):243-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2004.02.046. View

17.

Durojaiye L, OMeara M . A study of triage of paediatric patients in Australia. Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2002; 14(1):67-76. DOI: 10.1046/j.1442-2026.2002.00261.x. View

18.

Gravel J, Manzano S, Arsenault M . Safety of a modification of the triage level for febrile children 6 to 36 months old using the Paediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale. CJEM. 2008; 10(1):32-7. DOI: 10.1017/s1481803500009982. View

19.

Twomey M, Wallis L, Myers J . Limitations in validating emergency department triage scales. Emerg Med J. 2007; 24(7):477-9. PMC: 2658393. DOI: 10.1136/emj.2007.046383. View

20.

Armon K, Stephenson T, MacFaul R, Eccleston P, Werneke U . An evidence and consensus based guideline for acute diarrhoea management. Arch Dis Child. 2001; 85(2):132-42. PMC: 1718867. DOI: 10.1136/adc.85.2.132. View