Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35275337›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics2022

Effect of In-Situation Versus Manchester Triage System-Based Initial Case Management on Hospital-Based Mortality: A Before and After Study.

Sweta Singh, Shally Awasthi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sweta SinghDepartment of Pediatrics, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, 226003, India.
Shally AwasthiDepartment of Pediatrics, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, 226003, India. shally07@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1254-9802
King George's Medical University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare mortality and treatment-initiation time pre- and post introduction of Manchester Triage System (MTS) in patients of age group 1 mo to 15 y admitted in a tertiary care hospital in India.

methodsPre- and post intervention study conducted on a prospective cohort of patients hospitalized over a period of 6 mo, who were triaged using MTS and compared with a retrospective cohort, who were not formally triaged using any system and were admitted to the hospital during the past 6 mo, prior to commencement of the study. Intervention was training of resident doctors for five MTS urgencies using flowcharts and discriminators and displaying them in the emergency room. Data on clinical and outcome variables were abstracted from hospital case record sheets in both the cohorts.

resultsThe present study was conducted from May 2019 to April 2020 including 450 patients hospitalized from August 2019 to January 2020 in a prospective cohort and a retrospective cohort of 450 patients hospitalized from January 2019 to June 2019. Overall mortality in pre-MTS group was 26.2% (118/450) as compared to 20.9% (94/450) in post-MTS group (p value = 0.021). Average treatment time was reduced from 30 to 10 min after implementation of MTS (p value = 0.001).

conclusionImplementation of MTS in pediatric emergency leads to statistically significant reduction of mortality and average treatment-initiation time.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalTriageCase ManagementChildHospitalsHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesMortalityMTSPediatric emergency triageTreatment-initiation time

Identifiers

PMID35275337
OpenAlexW4220671770

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.