Question

write one page paper to compare and contrast to two studies including a discussion utility of point of care testing in Emergency department triage and early point of care testing at triage at emergency department on the methods, results and conclusions of studies.Create a PICOT statement

Answer 1

I. UTILITY OF POINT OF CARE TESTING IN ED TRIAGE.

BACKGROUND: Triage systems are commonly used in emergency departments (ED) to prioritize patients. Laboratory testing is not typically used to help risk-stratify patients at triage.

OBJECTIVES: We studied the utility of point-of-care (POC) testing at triage in ED patients with high-risk complaints.

METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study on a convenience sample of ED patients at an urban academic hospital with 60,000 annual visits. Patients who were triaged to the waiting area with any of the following criteria were approached for enrollment: (1) chest pain or shortness of breath in patients older than 40 years, (2) possible infection in the presence of two or more systemic inflammatory response system criteria in patients older than 18 years, and (3) patients >65 years with non-traumatic complaints. A total of 300 subjects were enrolled. All enrolled patients received POC testing that included a combination of Chem8+, hemoglobin, troponin, B-type natriuretic peptide, and lactate. The triage nurse completed a survey after receiving the results.

RESULTS: POC results was reported to be helpful in 56% of patients, changed the triage level in 15% of patients and led to 6% of patients being brought back for rapid physician evaluation. Overall, 50% of patients had one or more abnormal POC laboratory tests. There was no relationship between ED census and the likelihood of being helpful, changing the triage level, changing management, or bringing patients back any faster.

CONCLUSION: POC testing at triage is a helpful adjunct in triage of patients with high-risk ED complaints.

II. EARLY POINT OF CARE TESTING AT TRIAGE

- Reduces Care Time in Stable Adult Emergency Department Patients.

BACKGROUND: Core laboratory testing may increase length of stay and delay care.

OBJECTIVES: We compared length of emergency department (ED) care in patients receiving point-of-care testing (POCT) at triage vs. traditional core laboratory testing.

METHODS: We conducted a prospective, case-controlled trial of adult patients with prespecified conditions requiring laboratory testing and had POCT performed by a nurse after triage for: a basic metabolic panel, troponin I, lactate, INR (i-STAT System), urinalysis (Beckman Coulter Icon), or urine pregnancy test. Study patients were matched with controls based on clinical condition, gender, age, and time to be seen. Groups were compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum or Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS: We matched 52 POCT study patients with 52 controls. Groups were similar in age, gender, clinical condition, time to be seen by a physician (3.3 h, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-4.4, vs. 3.1 h, 95% CI 2.2-4.5 h, in POCT and control patients, respectively; p = 0.84), use of imaging, and disposition. Of 52 study patients, 3 (5.8%, 95% CI 2.0-15.9) were immediately transferred to the critical care area to be urgently seen by an emergency physician. POCT patients had a significantly shorter median (interquartile range [IQR]) ED care time than matched controls (7.6, 95% CI 5.1-9.5 vs. 8.5, 6.2-11.3 h, respectively; p = 0.015). Median [IQR] ED length of stay was similar in study patients and controls (9.6, 95% CI 7.9-14.5 vs. 12.5, 8.2-21.2 h, respectively; p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS: Among stable adult patients presenting to the ED with one of the prespecified conditions, early POCT at triage, compared with traditional core laboratory testing after evaluation by an ED provider, reduced ED care time by approximately 1 h.