Triage Nurse Initiation of Corticosteroids in Pediatric Asthma Is Associated With Improved Emergency Department Efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of nurse-initiated administration of oral corticosteroids before physician assessment in moderate to severe acute asthma exacerbations in the pediatric ED. METHODS: A time-series controlled trial evaluated nurse initiation of treatment with steroids before physician assessment in children with Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure score ≥4. One-to-one periods (physician-initiated and nurse-initiated) were analyzed from September 2009 through May 2010. In both phases, triage nurses initiated bronchodilator therapy before physician assessment, per Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure score. We reviewed charts of 644 consecutive children aged 2 to 17 years for the following outcomes: admission rate; times to clinical improvement, steroid receipt, mild status, and discharge; and rate of return ED visit and subsequent admission. RESULTS: Nurse-initiated phase children improved earlier compared to physician-initiated phase (median difference: 24 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1-50; P = .04). Admission was less likely if children received steroids at triage (odds ratio = 0.56; 95% CI: 0.36-0.87). Efficiency gains were made in time to steroid receipt (median difference: 44 minutes; 95% CI: 39-50; P < .001), time to mild status (median difference: 51 minutes; 95% CI: 17-84; P = .04), and time to discharge (median difference: 44 minutes; 95% CI: 17-68; P = .02). No differences were found in return visit rate or subsequent admission. CONCLUSIONS: Triage nurse initiation of oral corticosteroid before physician assessment was associated with reduced times to clinical improvement and discharge, and reduced admission rates in children presenting with moderate to severe acute asthma exacerbations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".