Volume 194 - Issue 4

Using the CEC paediatric calling criteria in emergency department triage

Authors:  Charles H Pain, Clifford F Hughes, Marino Festa, Jodie Ekholm and Matthew O’Meara

Med J Aust 2011; 194 (4): 210-211. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2011.tb03784.x
Published online: 21 February 2011

To the Editor: O’Leary and Major1 have opened debate on the issues raised by the New South Wales-wide introduction of the Clinical Excellence Commission Between the Flags (BTF) observation charts, which incorporate escalation thresholds for vital signs and other criteria. In the BTF charts, “yellow” zone criteria trigger a clinical review and “red” zone criteria, a rapid response.2 Evidence shows that deterioration can be recognised early, reducing serious consequences.3,4 O’Leary and Major trialled a subset of the draft BTF paediatric calling criteria in the context of triage in an emergency department, applying them retrospectively and comparing the actual triage decision with the one that would have been made using the BTF criteria alone. They also examined patient disposition for patients falling within the yellow and red zones. They concluded that “the physiological parameters ... are not suitable as a triage tool in the paediatric emergency department, do not replace an experienced triage nurse, and are a poor predictor of disposition”.1

We are not surprised by this conclusion.

The Australasian Triage Scale is designed to assess a patient’s urgency based on presenting problem and general appearance, possibly combined with physiological observations.5 Trialling a subset of vital signs, on their own, against the triage process, although interesting, is unlikely to demonstrate a strong correlation in decision making for the following reasons.

We recommend that more work be done on the value of the BTF vital signs criteria as a complement, not alternative, to triage processes.


Authors


Competing interests


References