Want to take quizzes and track your credits?
What is the accuracy of prehospital trauma triage and diagnostic tests for identifying children in need of specialized trauma care?
In this systematic review, no field triage protocol was both highly sensitive and specific for classifying the need of specialized pediatric trauma care; no protocol alone complied with the international standard of at least 95% sensitivity. Regional triage quality regarding initial transportation destination was unknown.
Inability of field triage protocols to identify children in need of specialized trauma care can lead to an incorrect choice of initial destination hospital, and this incorrect choice has been associated with higher mortality rates and increased costs.
Field triage of pediatric patients with trauma is critical for transporting the right patient to the right hospital. Mortality and lifelong disabilities are potentially attributable to erroneously transporting a patient in need of specialized care to a lower-level trauma center.
To quantify the accuracy of field triage and associated diagnostic protocols used to identify children in need of specialized trauma care.
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception to November 6, 2017, for studies describing the accuracy of diagnostic tests to identify children in need of specialized trauma care in a prehospital setting. Identified articles with a study population including patients not transported by emergency medical services were excluded. Quality assessment was performed using a modified version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2.
After deduplication, 1430 relevant articles were assessed, a full-text review of 38 articles was conducted, and 5 of those articles were included. All studies were observational, published between 1996 and 2017, and conducted in the United States, and data collection was prospective in 1 study. Three different protocols were studied that analyzed a combined total of 1222 children in need of specialized trauma care. One protocol was specifically developed for a pediatric out-of-hospital cohort. The percentage of pediatric patients requiring specialized trauma care in each study varied between 2.6% (110 of 4197) and 54.7% (58 of 106). The sensitivity of the prehospital triage tools ranged from 49.1% to 87.3%, and the specificity ranged from 41.7% to 84.8%. No prehospital triage protocol alone complied with the international standard of 95% or greater sensitivity. Undertriage and overtriage rates, representative of the quality of the full diagnostic strategy to transport a patient to the right hospital, were not reported for inclusive trauma systems or emergency medical services regions.
Conclusions and Relevance
It is crucial to transport the right patient to the right hospital. Yet the quality of the full diagnostic strategy to determine the optimal receiving hospital is unknown. None of the investigated field triage protocols complied with current sensitivity targets. Improved efforts are needed to develop accurate child-specific tools to prevent undertriage and its potential life-threatening consequences.
Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates
JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC
Accepted for Publication: March 9, 2018.
Corresponding Author: Rogier van der Sluijs, MD, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Ste Q02.2.301, Utrecht, the Netherlands (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Published Online: May 16, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1050
Author Contributions: Dr van der Sluijs had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Study concept and design: All authors.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: van der Sluijs, van Rein, Wijnand, van Heijl.
Drafting of the manuscript: van der Sluijs, Wijnand.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
Statistical analysis: van der Sluijs.
Administrative, technical, or material support: van Heijl.
Study supervision: Wijnand, Leenen, van Heijl.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
You currently have no searches saved.