ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Emergency Department Undertriage: Using Multidisciplinary Case Review to Drive Quality Improvement.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Triage determines the priority of evaluation. Undertriage, the underestimation of patients' acuity, poses a safety risk. Undertriaged patients in the pediatric emergency department (PED) experience longer times to intravenous placement, nebulization therapy, and disposition. We described a multidisciplinary, team-based case review process to decrease our rate of clinically important undertriage. Methods: We defined clinically important undertriage as patient visits with an Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage score of 4 or 5 in which the patient required admission or received aerosolized medication, oxygen, or intravenous medication. Cases were identified by an electronic health record tool, and then, a sample of cases was randomly assigned for review. Nurse-provider dyads and a multidisciplinary team reviewed undertriage cases monthly to determine whether a different ESI level should have been assigned based on information available at triage. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients triaged as ESI 4 and 5 with clinically important undertriage. The balancing measure was overtriage, defined as patients triaged as ESI 3 requiring fewer than 2 resources. Results: A total of 543 visits identified by electronic health record query were reviewed from September 2023 to September 2024. Interventions resulted in a decrease in the rate of clinically important undertriage by 14%, resulting in a centerline shift. Conclusions: Clinically important undertriage serves as a valuable quality metric to improve triage processes within the PED. Multidisciplinary team-based interventions successfully decreased the undertriage rate in the PED.
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.