Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34007228›Full record

ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2021

Validation of Dutch Obstetric Telephone Triage System: A Prospective Validation Study.

Bernice Engeltjes, Corlijn Van Dijk, Ageeth Rosman, Rudy Rijke, Fedde Scheele, Eveline Wouters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reliability of Dutch Obstetric Telephone Triage.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Bernice EngeltjesAthena Institute for Transdisciplinary Research, Faculty of Science, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8631-2352
Corlijn Van DijkDepartment of Obstetrics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ageeth RosmanDepartment of Healthcare Studies, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3751-2950
Rudy RijkeDepartment of Healthcare Studies, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Fedde ScheeleAthena Institute for Transdisciplinary Research, Faculty of Science, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9593-257X
Eveline WoutersDepartment of Tranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8911-9398

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objective and purposeA triage system that prioritizes care according to medical urgency has a favorable effect on safety and efficiency of emergency care. The Dutch obstetric telephone triage system is comparable to physical triage systems. It consists of five urgency levels: resuscitation and life threatening (U1), emergency (U2), urgent (U3), non-urgent (U4) and self-care advice (U5). The purpose of this study was to determine the diagnostic and external validity of the Dutch obstetric telephone triage system in obstetric emergency care. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe validity of the Dutch obstetric telephone triage system was studied in a prospective observational study in four hospitals. Diagnostic validity of usual care was determined by comparing the assigned urgency level of the Dutch obstetric telephone triage system with a reference standard. This reference standard was obtained by face-to-face clinical assessment in hospital following telephone triage. Clinical follow-up after assessment was also recorded. For statistical analyses, urgency levels were dichotomized into high urgency (U1, U2) and intermediate urgency (U3, U4). Self-care advice (U5) could not be studied because these patients were not referred to hospital.

resultsIn total, 983 cases (U1-U4) across the four hospitals were included, 625 (64%) cases were categorized as high urgency and 358 (36%) as intermediate urgency. The Dutch obstetric telephone triage system's urgency level agreed with the reference standard in 53% (n=525; 95% CI 50-57%). According to the reference standard the Dutch obstetric telephone triage system had undertriage in 16% (n=160) and overtriage in 30% (n=298) of the cases. Sensitivity for high urgency was 76% (95% CI 72-80), specificity 49% (95% CI 44-53). Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 60% (95% CI 56-63) and 67% (95% CI 62-72), respectively. After clinical assessment, urgent care was needed in 8.7% (n=31) of the intermediate-urgency cases, none of these cases were life threatening situations.

conclusionDOTTS shows an acceptable diagnostic validity with room for improvement.

Indexed as

diagnostic validityexternal validityobstetric emergency caresensitivitytelephone triageunder-triage

Identifiers

PMID34007228
PMCPMC8121677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.