Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 1.736
5-Year Impact Factor – 2.135
Index Copernicus  – 166.39
MEiN – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Ahead of print

doi: 10.17219/acem/149243

Publication type: original article

Language: English

License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Real-world diagnostic value of a nationwide standardized COVID-19 triage chart in Turkey

Reyhan Öztürk1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Gokhan Tazegul2,A,B,C,D,E,F

1 Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Ankara Polatlı Duatepe State Hospital, Turkey

2 Department of Internal Medicine Clinic, Ankara Polatlı Duatepe State Hospital, Turkey

Abstract

Background. Effective triage is critical during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. An appropriate triage plan is crucial to direct suspected COVID-19 cases to a designated area, in order to separate such patients from other patients and staff.
Objectives. To report the diagnostic value of the “Possible Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Case Questioning Guide for Outpatients”, a nationwide standard triage chart, and of the individual questions within the triage chart for detecting COVID-19 in patients admitted to our hospital.
Material and Methods. A total of 39,681 outpatients admitted to our hospital between April 1 and April 30, 2021, underwent triage questioning. The triage chart consisted of 3 symptom questions and 4 contact and travel questions. Patients who responded “yes” to at least 1 question were referred to the pandemic area; others were considered low-risk and did not undergo routine COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.
Results. Briefly, 3529 outpatients were referred to the pandemic area; among them, 1055 were PCR-positive. Among 36,152 low-risk patients, 94 were PCR-positive. The sensitivity of the triage chart was 91.82%, specificity was 93.58%, positive likelihood ratio was 14.30, and negative likelihood ratio was 0.09. Triage questions were in moderate agreement with PCR results (Cohen’s Kappa: 0.429, p < 0.0001). The diagnostic value of the triage chart was mainly attributed to the questions regarding possible COVID-19 infection symptoms rather than contact history. However, the questions included in the triage chart had none to slight agreement with the PCR test results in the pandemic outpatients.
Conclusion. The triage chart has high sensitivity and specificity for discriminating possible COVID-19 cases in all outpatients, but has unsatisfactory diagnostic value for predicting PCR positivity in pandemic outpatients. Therefore, the current triage chart should be used accordingly, i.e., to define possible COVID-19 cases rather than PCR-positive cases. Further studies regarding COVID-19 triage for possible and PCR-positive cases should also focus on the individual diagnostic value of less prevalent symptoms.

Key words

COVID-19, coronavirus, triage, viral pneumonia

References (26)

  1. Anderson RM, Heesterbeek H, Klinkenberg D, Hollingsworth TD. How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? Lancet. 2020;395(10228):931–934. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30567-5
  2. Peros G, Gronki F, Molitor N, et al. Organizing a COVID-19 triage unit: A Swiss perspective. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020;9(1):1506–1513. doi:10.1080/22221751.2020.1787107
  3. Rickman HM, Rampling T, Shaw K, et al. Nosocomial transmission of coronavirus disease 2019: A retrospective study of 66 hospital-acquired cases in a London teaching hospital. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(4):690–693. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa816
  4. Erika P, Andrea V, Cillis MG, Ioannilli E, Iannicelli T, Andrea M. Triage decision-making at the time of COVID-19 infection: The Piacenza strategy. Intern Emerg Med. 2020;15(5):879–882. doi:10.1007/s11739-020-02350-y
  5. Liang W, Liang H, Ou L, et al. Development and validation of a clinical risk score to predict the occurrence of critical illness in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(8):1081. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2033
  6. Du Y, Zhou N, Zha W, Lv Y. Hypertension is a clinically important risk factor for critical illness and mortality in COVID-19: A meta-analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2021;31(3):745–755. doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2020.12.009
  7. Zhou Y, Chi J, Lv W, Wang Y. Obesity and diabetes as high-risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2021;37(2):e3377. doi:10.1002/dmrr.3377
  8. Liang W, Yao J, Chen A, et al. Early triage of critically ill COVID-19 patients using deep learning. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):3543. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17280-8
  9. MedCalc Software Ltd. Diagnostic Test Evaluation Calculator v. 20.009. https://www.medcalc.org/calc/diagnostic_test.php. Accessed August 15, 2021.
  10. Altman DG, ed. Statistics with Confidence: Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. 2nd ed. London, UK: BMJ Books; 2011:109. ISBN:978-0-7279-1375-3.
  11. Kucewicz-Czech E, Damps M. Triage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2020;52(4):312–315. doi:10.5114/ait.2020.100564
  12. Tolone S, Gambardella C, Brusciano L, del Genio G, Lucido FS, Docimo L. Telephonic triage before surgical ward admission and telemedicine during COVID-19 outbreak in Italy: Effective and easy procedures to reduce in-hospital positivity. Int J Surg. 2020;78:123–125. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.060
  13. Hui DS, I Azhar E, Madani TA, et al. The continuing 2019-nCoV epidemic threat of novel coronaviruses to global health: The latest 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China. Int J Infect Dis. 2020;91:264–266. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2020.01.009
  14. Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: A descriptive study. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):507–513. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7
  15. Yang X, Yu Y, Xu J, et al. Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: A single-centered, retrospective, observational study. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(5):475–481. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30079-5
  16. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):497–506. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5
  17. Giacomelli A, Pezzati L, Conti F, et al. Self-reported olfactory and taste disorders in patients with severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 infection: A cross-sectional study. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(15):889–890. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa330
  18. Docherty AB, Harrison EM, Green CA, et al. Features of 20 133 UK patients in hospital with covid-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterization Protocol: Prospective observational cohort study. BMJ. 2020;369:m1985. doi:10.1136/bmj.m1985
  19. Kakodkar P, Kaka N, Baig M. A comprehensive literature review on the clinical presentation, and management of the pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Cureus. 2020;2(4):e7560. doi:10.7759/cureus.7560
  20. Pană BC, Lopes H, Furtunescu F, et al. Real-world evidence: The low validity of temperature screening for COVID-19 triage. Front Public Health. 2021;9:672698. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.672698
  21. Izquierdo-Dominguez A, Rojas-Lechuga M, Mullol J, Alobid I. Olfactory dysfunction in the COVID-19 outbreak. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2020;30(5):317–326. doi:10.18176/jiaci.0567
  22. Aldobyany A, Touman A, Ghaleb N, et al. Correlation between the COVID-19 respiratory triage score and SARS-COV-2 PCR test. Front Med. 2020;7:605689. doi:10.3389/fmed.2020.605689
  23. Mansella G, Rueegg M, Widmer AF, et al. COVID-19 triage and test center: Safety, feasibility, and outcomes of low-threshold testing. J Clin Med. 2020;9(10):3217. doi:10.3390/jcm9103217
  24. Lundon DJ, Kelly BD, Nair S, et al. A COVID-19 test triage tool, predicting negative results and reducing the testing burden on healthcare systems during a pandemic. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:563465. doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.563465
  25. Pathan SA, Thomas CE, Bhutta ZA, et al. Qatar prediction rule using ED indicators of COVID-19 at triage. Quatar Med J. 2021;2021(2):18. doi:10.5339/qmj.2021.18
  26. Jmaa MB, Ayed HB, Kassis M, et al. Epidemiological profile and performance of triage decision-making process of COVID-19 suspected cases in southern Tunisia. Afr J Emerg Med. 2022;12(1):1–6. doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2021.10.001