Limits...
The Reliability of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale: Meta-analysis.

Mirhaghi A, Heydari A, Mazlom R, Ebrahimi M - N Am J Med Sci (2015)

Bottom Line: The effect size was obtained by the z-transformation of reliability coefficients.Data were pooled with random-effects models and meta-regression was done based on method of moments estimator.The CTAS showed acceptable level of overall reliability in the emergency department but need more development to reach almost perfect agreement.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Evidence-Based Caring Research Center, Department of Medical-Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

ABSTRACT

Background: Although the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) have been developed since two decades ago, the reliability of the CTAS has not been questioned comparing to moderating variable.

Aims: The study was to provide a meta-analytic review of the reliability of the CTAS in order to reveal to what extent the CTAS is reliable.

Materials and methods: Electronic databases were searched to March 2014. Only studies were included that had reported samples size, reliability coefficients, adequate description of the CTAS reliability assessment. The guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) were used. Two reviewers independently examined abstracts and extracted data. The effect size was obtained by the z-transformation of reliability coefficients. Data were pooled with random-effects models and meta-regression was done based on method of moments estimator.

Results: Fourteen studies were included. Pooled coefficient for the CTAS was substantial 0.672 (CI 95%: 0.599-0.735). Mistriage is less than 50%. Agreement upon the adult version, among nurse-physician and near countries is higher than pediatrics version, other raters and farther countries, respectively.

Conclusion: The CTAS showed acceptable level of overall reliability in the emergency department but need more development to reach almost perfect agreement.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Fisher's Z transformed pooled estimates of participants' reliability (Random effects model) (NE = Nurse-expert, NN = Nursenurse, NP = Nurse-physician, PP = Physician-physician)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4525387&req=5

Figure 3: Fisher's Z transformed pooled estimates of participants' reliability (Random effects model) (NE = Nurse-expert, NN = Nursenurse, NP = Nurse-physician, PP = Physician-physician)

Mentions: Participants' pooled coefficients ranged from substantial 0.651 (CI 95%: 0.402-0.811) for nurse-expert agreement, 0.670 (CI 95%: 0.073-0.913) for physician-physician agreement, 0.721 (CI 95%: 0.630-0.793) for nurse-nurse agreement to almost perfect 0.800 (CI 95%: 0.774-0.823) for nurse-physician agreement [Figure 3].


The Reliability of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale: Meta-analysis.

Mirhaghi A, Heydari A, Mazlom R, Ebrahimi M - N Am J Med Sci (2015)

Fisher's Z transformed pooled estimates of participants' reliability (Random effects model) (NE = Nurse-expert, NN = Nursenurse, NP = Nurse-physician, PP = Physician-physician)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4525387&req=5

Figure 3: Fisher's Z transformed pooled estimates of participants' reliability (Random effects model) (NE = Nurse-expert, NN = Nursenurse, NP = Nurse-physician, PP = Physician-physician)
Mentions: Participants' pooled coefficients ranged from substantial 0.651 (CI 95%: 0.402-0.811) for nurse-expert agreement, 0.670 (CI 95%: 0.073-0.913) for physician-physician agreement, 0.721 (CI 95%: 0.630-0.793) for nurse-nurse agreement to almost perfect 0.800 (CI 95%: 0.774-0.823) for nurse-physician agreement [Figure 3].

Bottom Line: The effect size was obtained by the z-transformation of reliability coefficients.Data were pooled with random-effects models and meta-regression was done based on method of moments estimator.The CTAS showed acceptable level of overall reliability in the emergency department but need more development to reach almost perfect agreement.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Evidence-Based Caring Research Center, Department of Medical-Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

ABSTRACT

Background: Although the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) have been developed since two decades ago, the reliability of the CTAS has not been questioned comparing to moderating variable.

Aims: The study was to provide a meta-analytic review of the reliability of the CTAS in order to reveal to what extent the CTAS is reliable.

Materials and methods: Electronic databases were searched to March 2014. Only studies were included that had reported samples size, reliability coefficients, adequate description of the CTAS reliability assessment. The guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) were used. Two reviewers independently examined abstracts and extracted data. The effect size was obtained by the z-transformation of reliability coefficients. Data were pooled with random-effects models and meta-regression was done based on method of moments estimator.

Results: Fourteen studies were included. Pooled coefficient for the CTAS was substantial 0.672 (CI 95%: 0.599-0.735). Mistriage is less than 50%. Agreement upon the adult version, among nurse-physician and near countries is higher than pediatrics version, other raters and farther countries, respectively.

Conclusion: The CTAS showed acceptable level of overall reliability in the emergency department but need more development to reach almost perfect agreement.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus