PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

James G Adams

Publications and source records attributed to James G Adams.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Refining Emergency Severity Index triage criteria.

OBJECTIVES: The Emergency Severity Index (ESI) version 3 is a five-level triage acuity scale with demonstrated reliability and validity. Patients are rated from ESI level 1 (highest acuity) to ESI level 5 (lowest acuity). Clinical experience has demonstrated two levels of ESI level 2 patients: those who require immediate intervention and those who are stable to wait for at least ten minutes. Studies have found that few patients are rated ESI level 1, and it has been suggested that revisions to the ESI might result in appropriate reclassification of some sickest level 2 patients as level 1. The purpose of this study was to identify level 2 patients who might be reclassified as level 1 patients. METHODS: This was a multisite, prospective study. The authors identified ESI level 2 patients who required immediate, lifesaving intervention and calculated chi-square statistics and odds ratios for variables that predicted which ESI level 2 patients actually received immediate intervention. RESULTS: Immediate lifesaving interventions were provided for 117 (20.2%) of the 589 patients included in the study. Seventeen predictors of the need for immediate intervention were identified. The strongest predictor was the triage nurse's judgment of the need for immediate intervention, especially airway and medications. CONCLUSIONS: Specific clinical findings at triage for a subset of ESI level 2 patients were associated with immediate delivery of lifesaving interventions. Revisions to the ESI level 1 criteria may be beneficial.

Confidence Intervals↗
PubMed2004

The Emergency Severity Index (version 3) 5-level triage system scores predict ED resource consumption.

OBJECTIVES: The Emergency Severity Index (ESI) version 3 is a valid and reliable 5-level triage instrument that is gaining in popularity. A unique component of the ESI algorithm is prediction of resource consumption. Our objective was to validate the ESI version 3 triage algorithm in a clinical setting for the following outcome measures: actual resource consumption and patient length of stay in the emergency department and hospital. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, descriptive study of 403 ED patients who presented to a large academic medical center. The following dependent variables were abstracted from the ED record: number of ED resources used and emergency department and hospital length of stay. The relationship between ESI level and each of the dependent variables was determined. RESULTS: Mean resource use decreased monotonically as a function of ESI level 1 (5), 2 (3.89), 3 (3.3), 4 (1.2) and 5 (0.2). The ED average length of stay (minutes) per ESI level was as follows: 1 (195), 2 (255), 3 (304), 4 (193), and 5 (98). ESI triage level did not predict hospital length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: The ESI algorithm accurately predicted ED resource intensity and gives administrators the opportunity to benchmark ED length of stay according to triage acuity level.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Reliability and validity of scores on The Emergency Severity Index version 3.

OBJECTIVES: No widely used triage instrument accurately assesses patient acuity. The Emergency Severity Index (ESI) promises to facilitate reliable acuity assessment and possibly predict patient disposition. However, reliability and validity of ESI scores have not been established in emergency departments (EDs) outside the original research sites, and version 3 (v.3) of the ESI has not been evaluated. The study hypothesis was that scores on the ESI v.3 show good interrater reliability and predict hospital admission, admission site, and death. METHODS: The authors conducted an ED-based cross-sectional retrospective study of 403 systematically selected ED records of patients who presented to an academic medical center. Twenty-seven variables were abstracted, including triage level assigned, admission status, site, and death. Using a standard process, the researchers determined the true triage level. Weighted kappa and Pearson correlation were used to calculate interrater reliability between true triage level and triage score assigned by the registered nurse (RN). The relationships between the true ESI level and admission, admission site, and death were assessed. RESULTS: Interrater reliability between RN ESI level and the true ESI level was kappa = 0.89; Pearson r = 0.83 (p < 0.001). Hospital admission by ESI level was as follows: 1 (80%), 2 (73%), 3 (51%), 4 (6%), and 5 (5%). A higher percentage of ESI level-1 and level-2 patients (40%, 12%) were admitted to the intensive care unit than ESI levels 3-5 (2%, 0%, 0%). Admission to telemetry for ESI levels 1-5 was 20%, 19%, 7%, 1%, and 0%, respectively. Three of four patients who died were ESI level 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS: Scores on the ESI assigned by nurses have excellent interrater reliability and predict hospital admission and location of admission.

Adult↗