Comparison between the Smart Triage model and the Emergency Triage Assessment and Treatment guidelines in triaging children presenting to the emergency departments of two public hospitals in Kenya

• Published in: PLOS digital health 2024-08, Vol.3 (8), p.e0000408
• Main Authors: Kamau, Stephen, Kigo, Joyce, Mwaniki, Paul, Dunsmuir, Dustin, Pillay, Yashodani, Zhang, Cherri, Nyamwaya, Brian, Kimutai, David, Ouma, Mary, Mohammed, Ismael, Gachuhi, Keziah, Chege, Mary, Thuranira, Lydia, Ansermino, J Mark, Akech, Samuel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biology and Life Sciences; Medicine and Health Sciences; People and Places
• ISSN: 2767-3170; 2767-3170
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000408

Several triage systems have been developed, but little is known about their performance in low-resource settings. Evaluating and comparing novel triage systems to existing triage scales provides essential information about their added value, reliability, safety, and effectiveness before adoption. This study included children aged < 15 years who presented to the emergency departments of two public hospitals in Kenya between February and December 2021. We compared the performance of Emergency Triage Assessment and Treatment (ETAT) guidelines and Smart Triage (ST) models (ST model with independent triggers, and recalibrated ST model with independent triggers) in categorizing children into emergency, priority, and non-urgent triage categories. Sankey diagrams were used to visualize the distribution of children into similar or different triage categories by ETAT and ST models. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values for mortality and admission were calculated. 5618 children were enrolled, and the majority (3113, 55.4%) were aged between one and five years of age. Overall admission and mortality rates were 7% and 0.9%, respectively. ETAT classified 513 (9.2%) children into the emergency category compared to 1163 (20.8%) and 1161 (20.7%) by the ST model with independent triggers and recalibrated model with independent triggers, respectively. ETAT categorized 3089 (55.1%) children as non-urgent compared to 2097 (37.4%) and 2617 (46.7%) for the respective ST models. ETAT classified 191/395 (48.4%) admitted patients as emergencies compared to more than half by all the ST models. ETAT and ST models classified 25/49 (51%) and 39/49 (79.6%) deceased children as emergencies. Sensitivity for admission and mortality was 48.4% and 51% for ETAT and 74.9% and 79.6% for the ST models, respectively. Smart Triage shows potential for identifying critically ill children in low-resource settings, particularly when combined with independent triggers and performs comparably to ETAT. Evaluation of Smart Triage in other contexts and comparison to other triage systems is required.