Triage decisions and health outcomes among oncology patients: a comparative study of medical and surgical cancer cases in emergency departments
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Cancer-related emergencies are a significant challenge for healthcare systems globally, including Jordan. Effective triage is critical in ensuring timely and accurate prioritization of care, especially for surgical cancer patients requiring urgent intervention. However, under-triage-misclassification of high-acuity patients into lower urgency categories-can lead to significant delays and worsened outcomes. Despite the recognized importance of accurate triage, limited research has evaluated its impact on cancer patients in Jordan, particularly those requiring surgical care. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the timeliness and prioritization of care for cancer patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) in Jordan. The specific objectives were to examine the association between under-triage and treatment delays and assess its impact on key outcomes, including time to physician assessment, time to treatment, and hospital length of stay. METHODS: A retrospective cohort design was used to analyze data from 481 cancer patients admitted through the ED in four governmental hospitals across Jordan. Two cohorts were established: surgical cancer patients requiring emergency interventions and non-surgical cancer patients presenting with other oncological emergencies. Triage accuracy was assessed using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), and under-triage was identified when patients requiring high urgency care (CTAS I-III) were misclassified into lower urgency categories (CTAS IV-V). Data were collected from electronic health records and analyzed using multiple linear regression to evaluate the association between under-triage and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: The majority of patients were elderly, with a mean age of 62.6 years (± 10.7), and a significant proportion presented with advanced-stage cancer (83.4% in stages III and IV). Surgical patients frequently exhibited severe symptoms such as acute pain (51.6%) and respiratory discomfort (41.1%). Under-triage rates were 44.1% for surgical patients and 39.4% for non-surgical patients. Among surgical patients, under-triage significantly delayed time to physician assessment (β = 34.9 min, p < 0.001) and time to treatment (β = 68.0 min, p < 0.001). For non-surgical patients, under-triage delays were even greater, with prolonged physician assessment times (β = 48.6 min, p < 0.001) and ED length of stay (β = 7.3 h, p < 0.001). Both cohorts experienced significant increases in hospital length of stay (surgical: β = 3.2 days, p = 0.008; non-surgical: β = 3.2 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Under-triage in Jordanian EDs is strongly associated with significant delays in care for both surgical and non-surgical cancer patients, highlighting systemic gaps in acuity recognition and triage processes. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to improve triage accuracy, particularly through oncology-specific training and the integration of evidence-based tools like SIRS criteria. Enhancing ED processes for cancer patients is crucial to reducing delays, optimizing resource allocation, and improving clinical outcomes in this vulnerable population. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».