RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of a four-level triage scale for obstetrics and gynaecology emergencies and to explore the factors associated with an optimal triage. DESIGN: Thirty clinical vignettes presenting the most frequent indications for obstetrics and gynaecology emergency consultations were evaluated twice using a computerised simulator. SETTING: The study was performed at the emergency unit of obstetrics and gynaecology at the Geneva University Hospitals. SAMPLE: The vignettes were submitted to nurses and midwives. METHODS: We assessed inter- and intra-rater reliability and agreement using a two-way mixed-effects intra-class correlation (ICC). We also performed a generalised linear mixed model to evaluate factors associated triage correctness. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Triage acuity. RESULTS: We obtained a total of 1191 evaluations. Inter-rater reliability was good (ICC 0.748; 95% CI 0.633-0.858) and intra-rater reliability was almost perfect (ICC 0.812; 95% CI 0.726-0.889). We observed a wide variability: the mean number of questions varied from 6.9 to 18.9 across individuals and from 8.4 to 16.9 across vignettes. Triage acuity was underestimated in 12.4% of cases and overestimated in 9.3%. Undertriage occurred less frequently for gynaecology compared with obstetric vignettes [odds ratio (OR) 0.45; 95% CI 0.23-0.91; P = 0.035] and decreased with the number of questions asked (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.88-0.99; P = 0.047). Certification in obstetrics and gynaecology emergencies was an independent factor for the avoidance of undertriage (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.17-0.70; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The four-level triage scale is a valid and reliable tool for the integrated emergency management of obstetrics and gynaecology patients. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: The Swiss Emergency Triage Scale is a valid and reliable tool for obstetrics and gynaecology emergency triage.