Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31792560›Full record

ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2020

[Triage, screening, and assessment of geriatric patients in the emergency department].

M Groening, P Wilke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Availability of patient information in the emergency department : Wish and reality].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M GroeningSKH Stadtteilklinik Hamburg GmbH, Oskar-Schlemmer-Str. 9-17, 22115, Hamburg, Deutschland. m.groening@stadtteilklinik.de.
P WilkeAbteilung Notfallmedizin, Klinik Nauen, Havelland Kliniken GmbH, Nauen, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeriatric patients are increasingly dominating the daily routine in German emergency departments (ED). With their typical characteristics multimorbidity, polypharmacy, vulnerability, frailty and cognitive impairment, especially delirium, they are a special challenge for the processes in the ED. Though some emergency physician might consider "the old patient" as not exciting, there is a broad consensus that pragmatic geriatric screening tools are required. This consensus exists not only among the medical societies but also within the German Society for Emergency Medicine itself. In this article the characteristics of the geriatric patient, the pitfalls of triage systems and the difficulties to screen geriatric patients in a sensible manner are described. DISCUSSION: The common triage systems and the screening tools that have been developed for geriatric emergency patients have disadvantages. In Manchester Triage System (MTS) and Emergency Severity Index (ESI) geriatric patients are at risk of incorrect triage, though both systems, e.g., name acute cognitive impairment as a high-risk factor. The ESI has been validated for geriatric patients. The correct use of the triage algorithms is crucial, but for a triage nurse, acute cognitive impairment, e.g., might be difficult to identify. One reason for that is that many of the existing screening tools are not applicable in the ED or are without immediate benefit for the patient. More practical tools will have to be developed in the future.

Indexed as

Emergency MedicineGeriatric AssessmentTriageAgedAlgorithmsEmergency Service, HospitalHumansRisk FactorsDeliriumEmergency treatmentGeriatric patientMultimorbidityPolypharmacy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.