An interrater reliability study on the Gothenburg obstetric triage system- a new obstetric triage system.


Journal

BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 Oct 2021
Historique:
received: 03 06 2021
accepted: 22 09 2021
entrez: 3 10 2021
pubmed: 4 10 2021
medline: 8 10 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Triage, identifying patients with critical and time-sensitive disorders, is an integrated process in general emergency medicine. Obstetric triage is more specialised, requiring assessment of both woman, fetus and labour status. Failure to identify severely ill obstetric patients has repeatedly led to maternal morbidity and mortality. Reliable triage systems, adapted to obstetric patients as well as local conditions, are thus essential. The study aims to assess the interrater reliability (IRR) of the Gothenburg Obstetric Triage System (GOTS). Midwives (n = 6) and registered nurses with no experience in managing obstetric patients (n = 7), assessed 30 paper cases based on actual real-life cases, using the GOTS. Furthermore, a reference group consisting of two midwives and two obstetricians, with extensive experience in obstetric care, determined the correct triage level in order to enable analysis of over- and undertriage. IRR was assessed, both with percentage of absolute agreement and with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 388 assessments were performed, comprising all five levels of acuity in the GOTS. Absolute agreement was found in 69.6% of the assessments. The overall IRR was good, with a Kappa value of 0.78 (0.69-0.87, 95% CI) for final triage level. Comparison with reference group assessments established that over- and undertriage had occurred in 9% and 21% of the cases, respectively. The main reasons for undertriage were "not acknowledging abnormal vital sign parameters" and "limitations in study design". The GOTS is a reliable tool for triaging obstetric patients. It enables a standardized triage process unrelated to the assessors' level of experience in assessing and managing obstetric patients and is applicable for triaging obstetric patients presenting for emergency care at obstetric or emergency units.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Triage, identifying patients with critical and time-sensitive disorders, is an integrated process in general emergency medicine. Obstetric triage is more specialised, requiring assessment of both woman, fetus and labour status. Failure to identify severely ill obstetric patients has repeatedly led to maternal morbidity and mortality. Reliable triage systems, adapted to obstetric patients as well as local conditions, are thus essential. The study aims to assess the interrater reliability (IRR) of the Gothenburg Obstetric Triage System (GOTS).
METHODS METHODS
Midwives (n = 6) and registered nurses with no experience in managing obstetric patients (n = 7), assessed 30 paper cases based on actual real-life cases, using the GOTS. Furthermore, a reference group consisting of two midwives and two obstetricians, with extensive experience in obstetric care, determined the correct triage level in order to enable analysis of over- and undertriage. IRR was assessed, both with percentage of absolute agreement and with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 388 assessments were performed, comprising all five levels of acuity in the GOTS. Absolute agreement was found in 69.6% of the assessments. The overall IRR was good, with a Kappa value of 0.78 (0.69-0.87, 95% CI) for final triage level. Comparison with reference group assessments established that over- and undertriage had occurred in 9% and 21% of the cases, respectively. The main reasons for undertriage were "not acknowledging abnormal vital sign parameters" and "limitations in study design".
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The GOTS is a reliable tool for triaging obstetric patients. It enables a standardized triage process unrelated to the assessors' level of experience in assessing and managing obstetric patients and is applicable for triaging obstetric patients presenting for emergency care at obstetric or emergency units.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34600512
doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-04136-2
pii: 10.1186/s12884-021-04136-2
pmc: PMC8487102
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

668

Subventions

Organisme : Västra Götalandsregionen
ID : VGFOUREG-931220

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

Int Emerg Nurs. 2009 Oct;17(4):226-32
pubmed: 19782334
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2011 Sep-Oct;36(5):290-6
pubmed: 21857199
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Sep;96(9):1112-1119
pubmed: 28542709
BJOG. 2017 Nov;124(12):1867-1873
pubmed: 28294509
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
Ann Emerg Med. 2012 Nov;60(5):567-576.e4
pubmed: 22699018
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020 Jun 4;:1-11
pubmed: 32495659
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2015 Nov-Dec;44(6):710-6
pubmed: 26469540
Br J Anaesth. 2004 Jun;92(6):882-4
pubmed: 15064245
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006 May;32(5):239-45
pubmed: 16761787
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jul;128(1):e16-e19
pubmed: 27333358
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019 Jan;98(1):7-10
pubmed: 30155879
Emerg Med J. 2017 Jul;34(7):448-453
pubmed: 28473527
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Dec;18(12):1358-70
pubmed: 22168200
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;209(4):287-93
pubmed: 23535239
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 Dec;107(50):892-8
pubmed: 21246025
Arch Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Jan 13;7(1):e13
pubmed: 30847448
Am J Disaster Med. 2015 Winter;10(1):13-21
pubmed: 26102041
Nurs Crit Care. 2006 May-Jun;11(3):136-45
pubmed: 16719019
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2016 Feb;38(2):125-33
pubmed: 27032736
Emerg Med J. 2007 Jul;24(7):477-9
pubmed: 17582037
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Sep 18;17(1):309
pubmed: 28923021
J Thorac Oncol. 2011 Jan;6(1):6-7
pubmed: 21178713
J Emerg Nurs. 2007 Aug;33(4):319-23
pubmed: 17643791
Anaesthesia. 2013 Apr;68(4):354-67
pubmed: 23488833

Auteurs

Linnéa Lindroos (L)

Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of obstetrics and gynaecology, Diagnosvägen 15, Paviljong 7b, 416 50, Gothenburg, Sweden. linnea.lindroos@vgregion.se.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. linnea.lindroos@vgregion.se.

Helen Elden (H)

Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of obstetrics and gynaecology, Diagnosvägen 15, Paviljong 7b, 416 50, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Ove Karlsson (O)

Region Västra Götaland, NU Hospital Group, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Trollhättan, Sweden.
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Verena Sengpiel (V)

Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of obstetrics and gynaecology, Diagnosvägen 15, Paviljong 7b, 416 50, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH