ArticleMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2026
[Evaluation of the TriageClient digital decision support system for the sectoral allocation of emergency patients in an integrated emergency center : A secondary data analysis].
Article in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Efficiency of streaming and integrated care models for low acuity patients in acute and emergency care-results from a prospective cohort study].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Article
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
backgroundIntegrated emergency centers (INZ) in Germany use centralized initial assessment units to triage patients with structured digital tools and allocate them to the appropriate care setting (emergency department vs. out-of-hours primary care clinic). At the University Medical Center Freiburg, an INZ has operated routinely since October 2023. We evaluated the clinical decision support system TriageClient (Blackpine Medical GmbH, Freiburg, Germany) regarding safety, effectiveness, efficiency, and timeliness.
methodsAnonymized routine data of all emergency presentations in 2024 were analyzed. Primary endpoints were 7‑day in-hospital mortality and tracer diagnoses. The secondary endpoint was hospital admission ≥ 24 h. Efficiency was measured as sector switches from the primary care clinic into the emergency department, and effectiveness as concordance with family-practice-sensitive conditions. Noninferiority was assessed against external references. Timeliness was quantified as defects per million opportunities (DPMO) for a triage duration > 10 min.
resultsOf 67,552 presentations, 50,047 (74.1%) self-presenting patients were assessed with TriageClient. Final allocation was 38.5% to the primary care clinic and 61.5% to the emergency department. In Emergency Severity Index (ESI) levels 4/5 and in the primary care sector, mortality and tracer diagnoses were lower than in higher-acuity cohorts. Noninferiority/superiority was achieved for primary endpoints. The secondary endpoint met these criteria only after final nurse allocation. The sector-switch rate was 12.3%. DPMO for triage duration > 10 min was 1.36% (13,573 DPMO).
conclusionDigital initial assessment with TriageClient showed high safety, efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness in routine INZ operation. Multicenter studies should validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42154035What 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.