Systematic review: What is the impact of triage implementation on clinical outcomes and process measures in low‐ and middle‐income country emergency departments?

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionTriage is widely regarded as an essential function of emergency care (EC) systems, especially in resource‐limited settings. Through a systematic search and review of the literature, we investigated the effect of triage implementation on clinical outcomes and process measures in low‐ and middle‐income country (LMIC) emergency departments (EDs).MethodsStructured searches were conducted using MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Global Health. Eligible articles identified through screening and full‐text review underwent risk‐of‐bias assessment using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. The quality of evidence for each effect measure was summarized using GRADE.ResultsAmong 10,394 articles identified through the search strategy, 58 underwent full‐text review and 16 were included in the final synthesis. All utilized pre‐/postintervention methods and a majority were single center. Effect measures included mortality, waiting time, length of stay, admission rate, and patient satisfaction. Of these, ED mortality and time to clinician assessment were evaluated most frequently. The majority of studies using these outcomes identified a positive effect, namely a reduction in deaths and waiting time among patients presenting for EC. The quality of the evidence was moderate for these measures but low or very low for all other outcomes and process indicators.ConclusionsThere is moderate quality of evidence supporting an association between the introduction of triage and a reduction in deaths and waiting time. Although the available data support the value of triage in LMIC EDs, the risk of confounding and publication bias is significant. Future studies will benefit from more rigorous research methods.