Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial

Purpose: Intensive care triage practices and end-user interpretation of triage guidelines have rarely been assessed. We evaluated agreement between providers on the prioritization of patients for ICU admission using different triage guidelines. Materials and methods: A multi-centered randomized stud...

Full description

Autores:
Tipo de recurso:
Fecha de publicación:
2019
Institución:
Universidad del Rosario
Repositorio:
Repositorio EdocUR - U. Rosario
Idioma:
eng
OAI Identifier:
oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/22319
Acceso en línea:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.05.012
https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22319
Palabra clave:
Adult
Article
Cancer model
Cancer patient
Consensus
Controlled study
Critically ill patient
Emergency health service
Entropy
Female
Human
Intensive care unit
Kappa statistics
Male
Multicenter study
Oncology
Physician
Practice guideline
Randomized controlled trial
Resource allocation
Vignette
Guidelines
Intensive care unit triage
Oncology
Variability
Rights
License
Abierto (Texto Completo)
id EDOCUR2_05802153ca419c4cc51299a5676e6db2
oai_identifier_str oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/22319
network_acronym_str EDOCUR2
network_name_str Repositorio EdocUR - U. Rosario
repository_id_str
spelling 7c5b734b-8aad-4d94-aa08-561b4f1de357-1056705b2-8214-49ac-94ff-40600f4c4c5b-1bd976a83-96c3-4f4c-8fc4-492304e8ff32-13827d509-f256-4b0f-9eb0-bee93b3de390-1514894cf-e8c6-49b8-b25f-9a645fb453d2-1be48088e-61fc-41eb-bebb-e6019008b6b2-17f5d68b0-3aa2-4812-96f2-5a4ce514a975-1735e3df7-100d-4f2c-b57a-d1a08eb5d1f4-199cd3819-c49a-46fa-bf4c-5b3c95df3855-10f51347d-41a1-4312-80c9-5d33f0c6231e-11f7f37ca-dcb8-404d-a90b-29d57ed20c58-1e3c19c73-d5e4-4c64-9130-f7b76444b60d-1917cc660-6b55-466a-8552-34608d0f2770-17f375624-6e1e-4314-b53a-d6ef60a44627-158e586c6-dda4-43c0-a268-e843535dd817-12020-05-25T23:56:05Z2020-05-25T23:56:05Z2019Purpose: Intensive care triage practices and end-user interpretation of triage guidelines have rarely been assessed. We evaluated agreement between providers on the prioritization of patients for ICU admission using different triage guidelines. Materials and methods: A multi-centered randomized study on providers from 18 different countries was conducted using clinical vignettes of oncological patients. The level of agreement between providers was measured using two different guidelines, with one being cancer specific. Results: Amongst 257 providers, 52.5% randomly received the Society of Critical Care Prioritization Model, and 47.5% received a cancer specific flowchart as a guide. In the Prioritization Model arm the average entropy was 1.193, versus 1.153 in the flowchart arm (P = .095) indicating similarly poor agreement. The Fleiss' kappa coefficients were estimated to be 0.2136 for the SCCMPM arm and 0.2457 for the flowchart arm, also similarly implying poor agreement. Conclusions: The low agreement amongst practitioners on the prioritization of cancer patient cases for ICU admission existed using both general triage guidelines and guidelines tailored only to cancer patients. The lack of consensus on intensive care unit triage practices in the oncological population exposes a potential barrier to appropriate resource allocation that needs to be addressed. © 2019 Elsevier Inc.application/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.05.0128839441https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22319engW.B. Saunders2418Journal of Critical CareVol. 53Journal of Critical Care, ISSN:8839441, Vol.53,(2019); pp. 18-24https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85066465897&doi=10.1016%2fj.jcrc.2019.05.012&partnerID=40&md5=bd714e1ed6e9ec9a91168c613ba75b3cAbierto (Texto Completo)http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2instname:Universidad del Rosarioreponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocURAdultArticleCancer modelCancer patientConsensusControlled studyCritically ill patientEmergency health serviceEntropyFemaleHumanIntensive care unitKappa statisticsMaleMulticenter studyOncologyPhysicianPractice guidelineRandomized controlled trialResource allocationVignetteGuidelinesIntensive care unit triageOncologyVariabilityVariability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trialarticleArtículohttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501Rathi N.K.Haque S.A.Morales F.Kaul B.Ramirez R.Ovu S.Feng L.Dong W.Price K.J.Ugarte S.Raimondi N.Quintero A.Cardenas Y.R.Nates J.L.on behalf of the LACCTIN and ONCCC-R-NET groups10336/22319oai:repository.urosario.edu.co:10336/223192022-05-02 07:37:20.348223https://repository.urosario.edu.coRepositorio institucional EdocURedocur@urosario.edu.co
dc.title.spa.fl_str_mv Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
title Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
spellingShingle Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
Adult
Article
Cancer model
Cancer patient
Consensus
Controlled study
Critically ill patient
Emergency health service
Entropy
Female
Human
Intensive care unit
Kappa statistics
Male
Multicenter study
Oncology
Physician
Practice guideline
Randomized controlled trial
Resource allocation
Vignette
Guidelines
Intensive care unit triage
Oncology
Variability
title_short Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
title_full Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
title_sort Variability in triage practices for critically ill cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial
dc.subject.keyword.spa.fl_str_mv Adult
Article
Cancer model
Cancer patient
Consensus
Controlled study
Critically ill patient
Emergency health service
Entropy
Female
Human
Intensive care unit
Kappa statistics
Male
Multicenter study
Oncology
Physician
Practice guideline
Randomized controlled trial
Resource allocation
Vignette
Guidelines
Intensive care unit triage
Oncology
Variability
topic Adult
Article
Cancer model
Cancer patient
Consensus
Controlled study
Critically ill patient
Emergency health service
Entropy
Female
Human
Intensive care unit
Kappa statistics
Male
Multicenter study
Oncology
Physician
Practice guideline
Randomized controlled trial
Resource allocation
Vignette
Guidelines
Intensive care unit triage
Oncology
Variability
description Purpose: Intensive care triage practices and end-user interpretation of triage guidelines have rarely been assessed. We evaluated agreement between providers on the prioritization of patients for ICU admission using different triage guidelines. Materials and methods: A multi-centered randomized study on providers from 18 different countries was conducted using clinical vignettes of oncological patients. The level of agreement between providers was measured using two different guidelines, with one being cancer specific. Results: Amongst 257 providers, 52.5% randomly received the Society of Critical Care Prioritization Model, and 47.5% received a cancer specific flowchart as a guide. In the Prioritization Model arm the average entropy was 1.193, versus 1.153 in the flowchart arm (P = .095) indicating similarly poor agreement. The Fleiss' kappa coefficients were estimated to be 0.2136 for the SCCMPM arm and 0.2457 for the flowchart arm, also similarly implying poor agreement. Conclusions: The low agreement amongst practitioners on the prioritization of cancer patient cases for ICU admission existed using both general triage guidelines and guidelines tailored only to cancer patients. The lack of consensus on intensive care unit triage practices in the oncological population exposes a potential barrier to appropriate resource allocation that needs to be addressed. © 2019 Elsevier Inc.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.created.spa.fl_str_mv 2019
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv 2020-05-25T23:56:05Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv 2020-05-25T23:56:05Z
dc.type.eng.fl_str_mv article
dc.type.coarversion.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.spa.spa.fl_str_mv Artículo
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.05.012
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 8839441
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22319
url https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.05.012
https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22319
identifier_str_mv 8839441
dc.language.iso.spa.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.citationEndPage.none.fl_str_mv 24
dc.relation.citationStartPage.none.fl_str_mv 18
dc.relation.citationTitle.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Critical Care
dc.relation.citationVolume.none.fl_str_mv Vol. 53
dc.relation.ispartof.spa.fl_str_mv Journal of Critical Care, ISSN:8839441, Vol.53,(2019); pp. 18-24
dc.relation.uri.spa.fl_str_mv https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85066465897&doi=10.1016%2fj.jcrc.2019.05.012&partnerID=40&md5=bd714e1ed6e9ec9a91168c613ba75b3c
dc.rights.coar.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.acceso.spa.fl_str_mv Abierto (Texto Completo)
rights_invalid_str_mv Abierto (Texto Completo)
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.format.mimetype.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.spa.fl_str_mv W.B. Saunders
institution Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.instname.spa.fl_str_mv instname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.reponame.spa.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio institucional EdocUR
repository.mail.fl_str_mv edocur@urosario.edu.co
_version_ 1808391106265612288