Author/Authors :
Brandão andrade-Silva, Fernando Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil , Takemura, renan lyuji Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil , TavareS BellaTo, renaTo Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil , de camargo leonhardT, marcoS Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil , edSon kojima, kodi Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil , doS SanToS Silva, jorge Universidade de São Paulo - Faculdade de Medicina - Hospital das Clínicas (IOT-HCFMUSP) - Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
Abstract :
Objectives: To describe the clinical utility of the Manchester triage
scale adapted for orthopedic emergency departments and to
evaluate its validity in identifying patients with the need for hospital
care and its reliability when reproduced by different professionals.
Methods: Five triage flowcharts were developed based on the
Manchester scale for the following orthopedic disorders: traumatic
injuries, joint pain, vertebral pain, postoperative disorders, and
musculoskeletal infections. A series of patients triaged by two
orthopedists was analyzed to assess the concordance between
the evaluators (reliability) and the validity of the Manchester scale
as predictive of severity. Results: The reliability analysis included
231 patients, with an inter-observer agreement of 84% (Kappa =
0.77, p <0.001). The validity analysis included 138 patients. The
risk category had a strong association with the need for hospital
care in patients with trauma (OR = 6.57, p = 0.001) and was not
significant for non-traumatic disorders (OR = 2.42; p = 0.208). The
overall sensitivity and specificity were 64% and 76%, respectively.
Conclusion: The evaluated system presented high reliability. Its
validity was adequate, with good sensitivity for identifying patients
requiring hospital care among those with traumatic lesions. However,
the sensitivity was low for patients with non-traumatic lesions.
Level of Evidence III, Retrospective Study.
Keywords :
Triage , Classification , Risk , Orthopedics