Triage is a key principle in the effective management of a major incident. Its effectiveness is a balance between identifying those in need of life-saving intervention, and those triaged incorrectly as either needing/not needing life-saving intervention. The primary aim of this study was to report mortality in those under-triaged by existing major incident triage tools. Secondary aims were to report the ability of triage tools at identifying serious injury by body region (defined as the Abbreviated Injury Scale≥3).Patients and methods
Retrospective database analysis of the UK Trauma Audit Research Network for all adult patients (≥18 years) between 2006 and 2014. Patients were defined as priority one using a previously published list. Using the first recorded hospital physiology, patients were categorized by the Modified Physiological Triage Tool (MPTT), National Ambulance Resilience Unit (NARU) Sieve and existing Major Incident Medical Management and Support Triage Sieve. Categorical and continuous data were analyzed using a χ2-test and Mann–Whitney U-test respectively.Results
During the study period, 218 985 adult patients met the Trauma Audit Research Network inclusion criteria, with 24 791 (19.5%) priority one patients, of which 70% were male with a median age of 51 (33–71) years and injury severity score of 16 (9–25). The MPTT showed the lowest rate of under-triage (42.4%, P<0.001). Compared with existing methods, the MPTT under-triage population had significantly lower mortality (5.7%, P<0.001) with significantly fewer serious thorax and head injuries under-triaged than both NARU Sieve and Triage Sieve (P<0.001).Conclusion
This study has defined the implications of under-triage in the context of a major trauma population. The MPTT misses fewer severely injured patients, with a significant reduction in mortality. We suggest the MPTT to be considered as an alternative to existing primary major incident triage tools.