Emergency centre triage category allocations and their associated patient flow timeframes in a private healthcare group in the Middle East

1Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aims and Objectives: To identify and describe triage category allocations and their associated patient pathway timeframes in four emergency centres of a large private healthcare group in the United Arab Emirates. Background: The classification of patients in accordance with their acuity level is a complex task that requires quick and accurate allocation. Triage system categories have predetermined timeframes in which patients should be seen by a physician or treatment initiated for the best possible outcome. Design and Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted through the prospective capture and evaluation of medical records from patients triaged in each of the four emergency centres (two hospitals and two clinics) over a period of a month. The STROBE statement was used as a reporting framework. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the timeframes associated with the patient pathway through each EC and contrasted against their allocated triage category. Results: A total of 4,432 patient records were eligible for analysis from the four emergency centres. Triage category 4 (54.7%) was allocated the most with only a single category 1 patient seen between the four emergency centres. The median time from registration to triage was <10 min and triage to physician consult was <25 min. The overall length of stay of high-acuity cases was between 1 hr 13 min–2 hr 44 min, compared with low-acuity cases being 32–49 min. Overall time to physician was substantially lower than the targets set by the triage systems itself.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dippenaar, E. (2019). Emergency centre triage category allocations and their associated patient flow timeframes in a private healthcare group in the Middle East. Nursing Open, 6(4), 1399–1403. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.336

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free