ArticleOpen heart2020
Accuracy of telephone triage in primary care patients with chest discomfort: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Open heart, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Performance of the Dutch Triage standard in managing fever in children in out-of-hours primary care: a secondary analysis of the chili study.Family practice · 2026Article
- Sex differences in chest pain presentation, triage assessment, and outcomes in urgent primary care: findings from the TRACE cohort study.Primary health care research & development · 2025Article
- Gender-stratified analyses of symptoms associated with life-threatening events in patients calling out-of-hours primary care for shortness of breath.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the accuracy of telephone triage of callers with shortness of breath and/or chest discomfort in Dutch out-of-hours primary care: A retrospective observational study.The European journal of general practice · 2024Observational
- Accuracy of urgency allocation in patients with shortness of breath calling out-of-hours primary care: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Clinical decision rules in the pre-hospital triage of patients with chest pain.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Marburg Heart Score and INTERCHEST score compared to current telephone triage for chest pain in out-of-hours primary care.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023Article
- Evaluation of telephone triage among chest pain patients in out-of-hours primary care in the Netherlands (TRACE).Family practice · 2023Observational
- Article
- Article
- Gender-stratified analyses of symptoms associated with acute coronary syndrome in telephone triage: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the accuracy of semi-automatic assisted telephone triage in patients with acute chest discomfort against the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or other life-threatening events (LTEs).
methodsA cross-sectional study was performed of telephone conversations with 2023 patients with acute chest discomfort (pain, pressure, tightness or discomfort) who called out-of-hours services for primary care (OHS-PC) between 2014 and 2016. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicted values were calculated for a high urgency (patient seen within one hour) against the diagnoses of ACS and other LTEs. Diagnoses were retrieved from the patients' medical records in general practice, including hospital specialists' discharge letters.
resultsOf 2023 patients who called because of chest discomfort, 227 (11.2%) had an ACS (men 14.9%, women 8.2%) and 58 (2.9%) had another LTE (men 3.6%, women 2.3%). The sensitivity and specificity of a high Netherlands Triage System (NTS) urgency allocation against ACS/other LTEs were 0.73 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.78) and 0.43 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.45), respectively. In 13.2% of the calls the triage nurse overruled the NTS urgency, mostly by upscaling (11.0%). The sensitivity and specificity of the final urgency allocation were 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.90) and 0.34 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.37). The positive and negative predictive values of the final urgency were 0.18 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.19) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95), respectively.
conclusionsThe semi-automatic triage NTS tool underestimated the urgency in 27% of patients with ACS/other LTEs. Overruling by triage nurses improved safety, but still 14% of men and women with ACS/other LTEs received too low urgency, while efficiency remained poor. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7331.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.