ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Validation of physiological scoring systems in the accident and emergency department

C P Subbe¹, A Slater², D Menon³ and L Gemmell²

¹ Department of Medicine, Wrexham Maelor Hospital, Wrexham, UK
² Department of Critical Care, Wrexham Maelor Hospital
³ Department of Accident and Emergency Medicine, Wrexham Maelor Hospital

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
C P Subbe
77 Brook Lane, Chester CH2 2EE, UK; csubbe{at}hotmail.com

Background: Scoring systems that weigh the degree of abnormality of bedside observations might be able to identify patients at risk of catastrophic deterioration.

Objectives: To establish a frequency distribution for typical physiological scoring systems and to establish the potential benefit of adding these to an existing triage system in accident and emergency departments.

Methods: Physiological data were collected from 53 unselected emergency department admissions, from 50 patients admitted from the emergency department to intensive care, and from 50 patients admitted from emergency department to general wards and then to intensive care. Three different physiological scores were calculated from the data. Identification of sick patients by the scores was compared with triage information from the Manchester Triage System (MTS).

Results: Most patients admitted to the emergency department would not be identified as critically ill with the aid of physiological scoring systems. This was true even for patients who were admitted to intensive care. Only in 0–8% of unselected patients did the scores indicate increased risk. In 100 patients admitted to the intensive care, adding of medical emergency team call-out criteria, Modified Early Warning Score or Assessment Score for Sick patient Identification and Step-up in Treatment would identify none, seven or one patient in addition to those triaged as orange and red by the MTS.

Conclusions: Introduction of a physiological scoring system would have identified only a small number of additional patients as critically ill and added little to the triage system currently in use.

Abbreviations: APACHE, Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation; ASSIST, Assessment Score for Sick patient Identification and Step-up in Treatment; ICU, intensive care unit, IQR, interquartile range; MET, medical emergency team; MEWS, Modified Early Warning Score; MTS, Manchester Triage System

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Primary Survey

Ian Maconochie
Emerg. Med. J. 2006 23: 821. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Vorwerk, C, Loryman, B, Coats, T J, Stephenson, J A, Gray, L D, Reddy, G, Florence, L, Butler, N (2009). Prediction of mortality in adult emergency department patients with sepsis. Emerg. Med. J. 26: 254-258 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Egdell, P, Finlay, L, Pedley, D K (2008). The PAWS score: validation of an early warning scoring system for the initial assessment of children in the emergency department. Emerg. Med. J. 25: 745-749 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Patel, M., Maconochie, I. (2008). Triage in children. Trauma 10: 239-245 [Abstract]  
• Burch, V C, Tarr, G, Morroni, C (2008). Modified early warning score predicts the need for hospital admission and inhospital mortality. Emerg. Med. J. 25: 674-678 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bruijns, S R, Wallis, L A, Burch, V C (2008). A prospective evaluation of the Cape triage score in the emergency department of an urban public hospital in South Africa. Emerg. Med. J. 25: 398-402 [Abstract] [Full Text]