Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-747cfc64b6-fkkrz Total loading time: 0.192 Render date: 2021-06-12T15:43:55.454Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Introduction of Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score in Mass-Casualty Incident

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2018

Chiaki Toida
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Takashi Muguruma
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Takeru Abe
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Mafumi Shinohara
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Masayasu Gakumazawa
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Naoki Yogo
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Aya Shirasawa
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Naoto Morimura
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Background

Triage has an important role in providing suitable care to the largest number of casualties in a disaster setting, but there are no secondary triage methods suitable for children. This study developed a new secondary triage method named the Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score (PPATS) and compared its accuracy with current triage methods.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients under 16 years old transferred to an emergency center from 2014 to 2016 was performed. The PPATS categorized the patients, defined the intensive care unit (ICU)-indicated patients if the category was highest, and compared the accuracy of prediction of ICU-indicated patients among PPATS, Physiological and Anatomical Triage (PAT), and Triage Revised Trauma Score (TRTS).

Results

Among 137 patients, 24 (17.5%) were admitted to ICU. The median PPATS score of these patients was significantly higher than that of patients not admitted to ICU (11 [IQR: 9-13] versus three [IQR: 2-4]; P<.001). The optimal cut-off value of the PPTAS was six, yielding a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.8%, 86.7%, 60.5%, and 99.0%. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) was larger for PPTAS than for PAT or TRTS (0.95 [95% CI, 0.87-1.00] versus 0.65 [95% CI, 0.58-0.72]; P<.001 and 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.89]; P=.003, respectively). Regression analysis showed a significant association between the PPATS and the predicted mortality rate (r2=0.139; P<.001), ventilation time (r2=0.320; P<.001), ICU stay (r2=0.362; P<.001), and hospital stay (r2=0.308; P<.001).

Conclusions

The accuracy of PPATS was superior to other methods for secondary triage of children.

Toida C , Muguruma T , Abe T , Shinohara M , Gakumazawa M , Yogo N , Shirasawa A , Morimura N . Introduction of Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score in Mass-Casualty Incident. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(2):147152.

Type
Original Research
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest/funding: This work was funded by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 17K17064 [Grant-in-Aid for Young scientists (B)]. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

1. Smith, W. Triage in mass casualty situations. CME. 2012;30(11):413-415.Google Scholar
2. Wallis, LA, Carley, S. Comparison of pediatric major incident primary triage tools. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(6):475-478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Kaziel, J, Meckler, G, Brown, L, et al. Barriers to pediatric disaster triage: a qualitative investing. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2015;19(2):279-286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gausche-Hill, M. Pediatric disaster preparedness: are we really prepared? J Trauma. 2009;67(2 Suppl):s73-76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Fleming, S, Thompson, M, Stevens, R, et al. Normal ranges of heart rate and respiratory rate in children from birth to 18 years of age: a systematic review of observational studies. Lancet. 2011;377(9770):1011-1018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. American Heart Association. Pears Provider Manual: Pediatric Emergency Assessment, Recognition, and Stabilization. Dallas, Texas USA: American Heart Association; 2012.Google Scholar
7. Garner, A, Lee, A, Harrison, K, et al. Comparative analysis of multiple-casualty incident triage algorithms. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38(5):541-548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Aitken, P, FitzGerald, G. Disaster triage: evidence, consistency, and standard practice. Emerg Med Australas. 2012;24(3):222-224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Donofrio, JJ, Kaji, AH, Claudius, IA, et al. Development of a pediatric mass casualty triage algorithm validation tool. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2016;20(3):343-353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Advanced Life Support Group. Major Incident Medical Management and Support: The Practical Approach at the Scene. 3rd edition. Hoboken, New Jersey USA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

Toida et al. supplementary material

Toida et al. supplementary material 1

Download Toida et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 6 MB
6
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Introduction of Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score in Mass-Casualty Incident
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Introduction of Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score in Mass-Casualty Incident
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Introduction of Pediatric Physiological and Anatomical Triage Score in Mass-Casualty Incident
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *