The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm is non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm: A cluster-randomized study.

INTRODUCTION: Triage systems with limited room for clinical judgment are used by emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm (CTA) is a simplified triage system with a clinical assessment. METHODS: The trial was a non-inferiority, two-center cluster-randomized crossover study where CTA was compared to a local adaptation of Adaptive Process Triage (ADAPT). CTA involves initial categorization based on vital signs with a final modification based on clinical assessment by an ED nurse. We used 30-day mortality with a non-inferiority margin at 0.5%. Predictive performance was compared using Receiver Operator Characteristics. RESULTS: We included 45,347 patient visits, 23,158 (51%) and 22,189 (49%) were triaged with CTA and ADAPT respectively with a 30-day mortality of 3.42% and 3.43% (P = 0.996) a difference of 0.01% (95% CI: -0.34 to 0.33), which met the non-inferiority criteria. Mortality at 48 hours was 0.62% vs. 0.71%, (P = 0.26) and 6.38% vs. 6.61%, (P = 0.32) at 90 days for CTA and ADAPT. CTA triaged at significantly lower urgency level (P<0.001) and was superior in predicting 30-day mortality, Area under the curve: 0.67 (95% CI 0.65-0.69) compared to 0.64 for ADAPT (95% CI 0.62-0.66) (P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in rate of admission to the intensive care unit, length of stay, waiting time nor rate of readmission within 30 or 90 days. CONCLUSION: A novel triage system based on vital signs and a clinical assessment by an ED nurse was non-inferior to a traditional triage algorithm by short term mortality, and superior in predicting 30-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02698319.

The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Crowding in the emergency department (ED) is a well-known problem resulting in an increased risk of adverse outcomes. Effective triage might counteract this problem by identifying the sickest patients and ensuring early treatment. In the last two decades, systematic triage has become the standard in ED's worldwide. However, triage models are also time consuming, supported by limited evidence and could potentially be of more harm than benefit. The aim of this study is to develop a quicker triage model using data from a large cohort of unselected ED patients and evaluate if this new model is non-inferior to an existing triage model in a prospective randomized trial. METHODS: The Copenhagen Triage Algorithm (CTA) study is a prospective two-center, cluster-randomized, cross-over, non-inferiority trial comparing CTA to the Danish Emergency Process Triage (DEPT). We include patients ≥16 years (n = 50.000) admitted to the ED in two large acute hospitals. Centers are randomly assigned to perform either CTA or DEPT triage first and then use the other triage model in the last time period. The CTA stratifies patients into 5 acuity levels in two steps. First, a scoring chart based on vital values is used to classify patients in an immediate category. Second, a clinical assessment by the ED nurse can alter the result suggested by the score up to two categories up or one down. The primary end-point is 30-day mortality and secondary end-points are length of stay, time to treatment, admission to intensive care unit, and readmission within 30 days. DISCUSSION: If proven non-inferior to standard DEPT triage, CTA will be a faster and simpler triage model that is still able to detect the critically ill. Simplifying triage will lessen the burden for the ED staff and possibly allow faster treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02698319 , registered 24. of February 2016, retrospectively registered.

Global left ventricular longitudinal strain is closely associated with increased neurohormonal activation after acute myocardial infarction in patients with both reduced and preserved ejection fraction: a two-dimensional speckle tracking study.

AIMS: N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is released in response to increased myocardial wall stress and is associated with adverse outcome in acute myocardial infarction. However, little is known about the relationship between longitudinal deformation indices and NT-proBNP. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively included 611 patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to a tertiary centre and performed echocardiography within 48 h of admission. Global longitudinal myocardial function was assessed by two-dimensional speckle tracking simultaneously with measurement of plasma NT-proBNP. A significant linear relationship between NT-proBNP and global longitudinal strain (GLS) was found (P < 0.0001, r = 0.62). Weaker correlation was found between NT-proBNP and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; P < 0.0001, r = - 0.44). GLS emerged on multivariable analysis including age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, Killip class ≥2, diabetes, hypertension, presence of ST segment elevation, anterior infarction, troponin level, left atrial volume index, mitral valve deceleration time, and E/e' as the strongest predictor of log(NT-proBNP) (P < 0.0001). In patients with preserved systolic function (LVEF >45%), GLS remained strongly correlated with NT-proBNP (P < 0.0001, r = 0.50). The C-statistic associated with prediction of upper vs. lower quartiles of NT-proBNP was significantly higher for GLS compared with LVEF (0.76 vs. 0.56; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Left ventricular longitudinal function assessed by GLS exhibits a stronger association with NT-proBNP levels in acute myocardial infarction compared with LVEF. In patients with apparently preserved systolic function, GLS is superior to LVEF in identifying increased neurohormonal activation.

Effect of teaching and type of stethoscope on cardiac auscultatory performance.

BACKGROUND: Auscultation of the heart is a routine procedure. It is not known whether auscultatory skills can be improved by teaching or with the use of an advanced stethoscope. METHODS: This study was a randomized trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Seventy-two house officers were randomized to a simple or an advanced stethoscope and to a 4-hour course in auscultation or no course. The doctors auscultated 20 patients' hearts and categorized findings as normal or as one or more of 5 categories of heart diseases. Patients were selected such that 16 had a known heart disease as well as a corresponding murmur and 4 had no heart disease or murmur. Auscultatory performance was assessed as concordance with echocardiographic findings and interobserver variation. RESULTS: Doctors using the advanced stethoscope diagnosed 35% of the patients correctly, as compared with doctors using the simple stethoscope who did 33% of the patients (P = .27). Similarly, 34% of the patients were diagnosed correctly by doctors who had received teaching as compared with 33% of those who were by doctors who had received no teaching (P = .41). The kappa values were higher for doctors who had received teaching for aortic stenosis (0.43 vs 0.28, P = .004) and ventricular septum defect (0.07 vs 0.01, P = .003). There was no difference between groups for any other single murmur or for the detection of murmurs as such. CONCLUSION: Heart auscultation findings were in poor accordance with echocardiographic findings and had high interobserver variation. Neither outcome improved to any important extent with the subjects' use of an advanced stethoscope or attending of a course in heart auscultation.

Does a distal forearm fracture lead to evaluation for osteoporosis? A retrospective cohort study in 147 Danish women.

In postmenopausal women, a low-trauma distal forearm fracture is a risk factor for osteoporosis and future fracture, which indicates osteoporosis follow-up according to prevailing guidelines. We decided to determine how often women over 45 yr presenting with a low-trauma distal forearm fracture to a Danish emergency department during a 1-yr period were followed up for osteoporosis. We performed a retrospective review of hospital records and we sent the women and their general practitioners (GPs) questionnaires regarding the follow-up undertaken in primary care. Finally, we invited the women for a densitometry to estimate the prevalence of osteoporosis. From May 1, 2001 to April 30, 2002, 147 women presented with a low-trauma distal forearm fractures. According to the review of hospital records, none of the women was referred for bone densitometry or spine X-rays. One woman had calcium and vitamin D supplementation (CVDS) prescribed and two were recommended to consult their GPs for osteoporosis follow-up. In primary care, 12 women were referred for densitometry or spine X-rays, and 11 women started CVDS after the fracture. Women with risk factors for osteoporosis in addition to the forearm fracture were not more likely to be referred for densitometry or spine X-rays (p = 0.10). The prevalence of osteoporosis was 24% among the 79 women who underwent densitometry. Our study demonstrates a low use of available measures to reduce the risk of future fracture in women with a low-trauma distal forearm fracture, and it emphasizes the need to decide on a local level how to provide osteoporosis follow-up for women with fragility fractures.