Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia
Corso di laurea in infermieristica - Sede di Modena
| Thesis Title | Comparison between nursing triage methodologies in emergency department: practise and evidences. |
|---|---|
| Name | Kaur Kuldip |
| Supervisor(s) | Gelati Luca |
| Academic Year | 2017/18 |
| Thesis type | Non research thesis |
Abstract
The overcrowding is present in all hospitals of industrialized countries. Many people in the emergency department (ED) do not express urgency-related health needs. Excluding the original mandate of the ED that is linked to the resolution of emergency and urgency cases requires evaluation strategy for people to establish treatment priorities and dedicate the necessary resources to the most serious cases. Object of the study are the triage strategies useful and necessary to allocate the resources in an effective and adequate way in contexts where the request for assistance is disproportionate compared to the available resources of the PS. Different strategies of triage have been introduced in several countries: Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), Australasian Triage Scale (ATS), Manchester Triage Scale (MTS), Emergency Severity Index (ESI) and various triage systems used in Italy to evaluate the severity of patients and assign the treatment priority code. The data in the scientific literature was collected and analyzed in order to explore and compare the various Triage systems used to take care of the patient during the arrival in ED. The aim of the thesis is to compare the different international and national nursing Triage systems by highlighting assessment methodology, priority classification, staff training strategies and sensitivity \ specificity in identifying emergency situations. International Triage systems are not validated on italian territory. And they are insensitive in intercepting the codes of minor gravity; but all are able to identify patients with severe clinical conditions. Concluding, the international Triage methodologies do not present a significant difference between them, and are individually able to guarantee the correct attribution of the priority level effectively.