To ascertain the awareness among Triage Staff about Clinical Conditions treated in the department of Hand Surgery from their Referral Pattern: A Cross Sectional Observational Study in a Tertiary Care Center

Article Information

Maithreyi Sethu*, Srinivasan Rajappa

Department of Hand Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Sri RamachandraNagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India 600116

*Corresponding Author: Maithreyi Sethu, Department of Hand Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Sri RamachandraNagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India 600116

Received: 22 June 2022; Accepted: 27 June 2022; Published: 20 July 2023

Citation: Maithreyi Sethu, Srinivasan Rajappa. To ascertain the awareness among Triage Staff about Clinical Conditions treated in the department of Hand Surgery from their Referral Pattern: A Cross Sectional Observational Study in a Tertiary Care Center. Journal of Surgery and Research. 6 (2023): 264-271.

View / Download Pdf Share at Facebook

Abstract

Objectives

• To ascertain the referral pattern and the awareness about clinical conditions treated in the Department of Hand Surgery among the triage staff.

• To determine if is there a difference between the triaging by the doctors and by the junior (less than 5 years in service) and the senior nurses (more than 5 years in service) with reference to clinical conditions which are treated in the Hand surgery Department.

Materials and methods
This was a cross-sectional observational study which was conducted in a tertiary care center in India. The study involved a total of 115 participants with junior nurses, senior nurses and doctors working in the triage service of the hospital. All participants were shown a semi-structured tool with clinical scenarios which had photographs and clinical information in text, on a computer screen using Microsoft PowerPoint. The clinical scenario was also narrated to them. The referral pattern was noted down and tabulated.

Results
It is interesting to note that, • Only in 1 out of the 20 scenarios, hand surgery was the most frequently referred department. • Most of the Bony injuries of the hand and the forearm were mainly referred to orthopaedics. • Burns and raw areas of the forearm were frequently referred to plastic surgery. • Hand deformities were commonly referred to either plastic surgery or orthopaedics. • Nerve injuries were referred to neurology and orthopaedics typically. • Orthopaedics was the most referred department. • The average reference percentage of the junior nurse was 3.91%, senior nurse was 21.9% and doctors was 23.95%. Junior nurses performed exceedingly poor in referring cases to the department of hand surgery as compared to the other two subgroups.

Conclusion
This study shows us the drawbacks in our present triaging system emphasizing the need for training our staff on new departments referral pattern, the advancements, and updated protocols.

Keywords

Hand Surgery, Tertiary Care Center, Triage Staff

Triage articles; Hand surgery department articles; Hand surgery referral articles; Triaging staff articles; Out patient referral articles

Hand Surgery articles Hand Surgery Research articles Hand Surgery review articles Hand Surgery PubMed articles Hand Surgery PubMed Central articles Hand Surgery 2023 articles Hand Surgery 2024 articles Hand Surgery Scopus articles Hand Surgery impact factor journals Hand Surgery Scopus journals Hand Surgery PubMed journals Hand Surgery medical journals Hand Surgery free journals Hand Surgery best journals Hand Surgery top journals Hand Surgery free medical journals Hand Surgery famous journals Hand Surgery Google Scholar indexed journals Tertiary Care Center articles Tertiary Care Center Research articles Tertiary Care Center review articles Tertiary Care Center PubMed articles Tertiary Care Center PubMed Central articles Tertiary Care Center 2023 articles Tertiary Care Center 2024 articles Tertiary Care Center Scopus articles Tertiary Care Center impact factor journals Tertiary Care Center Scopus journals Tertiary Care Center PubMed journals Tertiary Care Center medical journals Tertiary Care Center free journals Tertiary Care Center best journals Tertiary Care Center top journals Tertiary Care Center free medical journals Tertiary Care Center famous journals Tertiary Care Center Google Scholar indexed journals Triage Staff articles Triage Staff Research articles Triage Staff review articles Triage Staff PubMed articles Triage Staff PubMed Central articles Triage Staff 2023 articles Triage Staff 2024 articles Triage Staff Scopus articles Triage Staff impact factor journals Triage Staff Scopus journals Triage Staff PubMed journals Triage Staff medical journals Triage Staff free journals Triage Staff best journals Triage Staff top journals Triage Staff free medical journals Triage Staff famous journals Triage Staff Google Scholar indexed journals Bony injuries articles Bony injuries Research articles Bony injuries review articles Bony injuries PubMed articles Bony injuries PubMed Central articles Bony injuries 2023 articles Bony injuries 2024 articles Bony injuries Scopus articles Bony injuries impact factor journals Bony injuries Scopus journals Bony injuries PubMed journals Bony injuries medical journals Bony injuries free journals Bony injuries best journals Bony injuries top journals Bony injuries free medical journals Bony injuries famous journals Bony injuries Google Scholar indexed journals orthopaedics articles orthopaedics Research articles orthopaedics review articles orthopaedics PubMed articles orthopaedics PubMed Central articles orthopaedics 2023 articles orthopaedics 2024 articles orthopaedics Scopus articles orthopaedics impact factor journals orthopaedics Scopus journals orthopaedics PubMed journals orthopaedics medical journals orthopaedics free journals orthopaedics best journals orthopaedics top journals orthopaedics free medical journals orthopaedics famous journals orthopaedics Google Scholar indexed journals ulnar nerve injury articles ulnar nerve injury Research articles ulnar nerve injury review articles ulnar nerve injury PubMed articles ulnar nerve injury PubMed Central articles ulnar nerve injury 2023 articles ulnar nerve injury 2024 articles ulnar nerve injury Scopus articles ulnar nerve injury impact factor journals ulnar nerve injury Scopus journals ulnar nerve injury PubMed journals ulnar nerve injury medical journals ulnar nerve injury free journals ulnar nerve injury best journals ulnar nerve injury top journals ulnar nerve injury free medical journals ulnar nerve injury famous journals ulnar nerve injury Google Scholar indexed journals Elbow Sprain articles Elbow Sprain Research articles Elbow Sprain review articles Elbow Sprain PubMed articles Elbow Sprain PubMed Central articles Elbow Sprain 2023 articles Elbow Sprain 2024 articles Elbow Sprain Scopus articles Elbow Sprain impact factor journals Elbow Sprain Scopus journals Elbow Sprain PubMed journals Elbow Sprain medical journals Elbow Sprain free journals Elbow Sprain best journals Elbow Sprain top journals Elbow Sprain free medical journals Elbow Sprain famous journals Elbow Sprain Google Scholar indexed journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy Research articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy review articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy PubMed articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy PubMed Central articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy 2023 articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy 2024 articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy Scopus articles Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy impact factor journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy Scopus journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy PubMed journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy medical journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy free journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy best journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy top journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy free medical journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy famous journals Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy Google Scholar indexed journals

Article Details

Background

Triage, derived from the French word trier meaning ‘to sort,’ is a process of prioritization [1]. Though triage has its origins in military history, today it is used in a variety of medical settings [2] from sorting/ referring the patients at the reception or in the Emergency department to prioritising patients at the site of mass causality. Effective triage depends on careful choice as to who should make triage decisions [3]. It is optimal when the staff allocated for triaging are trained for it. A triage system must not only minimize risks to patient safety and misallocation of resources but must triage patients appropriately in an efficient manner [4]. Recognition of the specialty of hand surgery and knowledge about the spectrum of cases it deals with seems to be in its infancy among the health professionals in India. Referrals to hand surgery department depend on the knowledge of staff handling triage in that institution. If the awareness of triage staff about Hand surgery and the spectrum of work which hand surgeons do is inadequate, this would result in inappropriate referrals of patients to other departments. This practice would in turn affect the growth and progress of the Hand surgery department.

Objectives

  1. To ascertain the referral pattern and the awareness about clinical conditions treated in the Department of Hand Surgery among the triage staff.
  2. To determine if is there a difference between the triaging by the doctors and by the junior (less than 5 years in service) and the senior nurses (more than 5 years in service) with reference to clinical conditions which are treated in the Hand surgery Department.

Method

This was a cross-sectional observational study which was conducted in a tertiary care center in India between January 2022 and February 2022. The study involved a total of 115 participants who consisted of junior nurses (experience less than 5 years), senior nurses (experience more than 5 years) and doctors working in the triage service of the hospital. The study was conducted in small batches of 3 to 7 volunteers. They were informed that it was a voluntary assessment study and were given the option of not participating. Consent was taken from the ones who had volunteered and at no point was it revealed to them that the study was conducted by the Department of Hand surgery to reduce the bias. Their personal information which would lead to their identification was not revealed in any part of the study. All participants were shown a semi-structured tool with 25 clinical scenarios which had photographs and clinical information in text, on a computer screen using Microsoft PowerPoint. The clinical scenario was also narrated to them. Out of the 25 clinical scenarios, 20 pertained to clinical conditions which were treated in the department of Hand surgery. Consensus on which is the ideal department to send the patients to in these 25 clinical scenarios in this institution was determined by a panel of intra-institutional experts, which involved three plastic surgeons and two orthopedicians from the institution.

The participants were shown each clinical scenario at one minute intervals. During this minute each volunteer had to respond by writing down which department they would refer the patient to first.

The responses were tabulated in an excel sheet and statistical analysis was used to calculate the mean, standard deviations and percentages.

  1. For each of the clinical scenario, the three most frequently marked departments to which the triaging staff would refer the patients to was calculated as percentage.
  2. The participants were then divided into junior nurses, senior nurses and doctors. And the correct responses (correctly referring the patient to the department of hand surgery) given by each group was calculated as a percentage.
  3. The difference in this percentage of responses (referring the patient to the department of hand surgery) between the doctors, junior and senior nurses were compared.

Inclusion criteria

  1. All the nurses and doctors (which included House surgeons/ CRRI and first year post graduates from different specialities) in the triaging service area of the tertiary care hospital

Exclusion

  1. Junior nurses with less than 1 month of experience at the triage
  2. Non-medical staff from the administrative wing
  3. Staff who were aware about this triage study
  4. Staff in the emergency department
  5. Staff in the reception area of the different subspecialities

The Institutional Ethics Committee approval was sought before starting the study, IEC-NI/21/OCT/80/136.

Results

The study involved 115 participants (triaging staff) with 36 doctors and 79 nurses. Out of the 79, 38 were junior nurses and 41 were senior nurses. Most of the doctors were fresh graduates within 2 years of completing their under-graduation. Most of the nurses were females. The sex distribution was better with doctors. The average age of nurses was 28.9 years while that of the doctors was 23.4 years. The demography of the volunteers has been tabulated in table 1. The three most frequently marked departments to which the triaging staff would refer the patients to was calculated as percentages (table 2). To summarize the results, it was found that in none of the 20 clinical conditions Hand Surgery made it as the leading choice of referral except in a clinical scenario of ulnar nerve injury. But even in this case it shared the first place with orthopaedics.

Variable

Nurses (N=79)

Doctors (N=36)

Age (years)

28.9+/- 6.9

23.4 +/- 1.4

Gender

   

Male

1 (1.2%)

20 (55.5%)

Female

78 (98.7%)

16 (44.4%)

Experience

   

<5yrs

41

36

>5yrs

38

0

In months

80.2 +/- 4.4

6.0 +/- 1.7

Table 1: Demography of the volunteers

It is interesting to note that,

  1. Most of the Bony injuries of the hand and the forearm were mainly referred to Orthopaedics.
  2. Burns and raw areas of the forearm were referred to plastic surgery.
  3. Problems with soft-tissue injury such as flexor tendon injury and Volkmann’s Ischemic contracture were also referred to orthopaedics.
  4. When terms like small vascular lesion or tumours/ growth were used, patients were often referred to vascular surgery and onco-surgery department, without much attention being given to the entire clinical scenario.
  5. Hand deformities were referred to either plastic surgery (Cleft hand deformity) or orthopaedics (Madelung deformity).
  6. Nerve injuries such as Thoracic outlet syndrome and traumatic brachial plexus palsy were referred to Neurology, whereas cut injury of nerve in the forearm and obstetric brachial plexus palsy were referred to orthopaedics.
  7. When the patient had swelling or weakness of the forearm such as in flexor tenosynovitis or carpal tunnel syndrome but the history showed associated diabetes, fever or hypothyroidism, most of the patients were referred to the department of medicine.
  8. Orthopaedics was the most referred department.
  9. Physiotherapy also made it to the top three for conditions such as flexor tendon injury, scaphoid fracture, elbow pain and periarthritis shoulder (6,7,17 & 19).

Diagnosis & Department to be referred

Rank

Most referred Departments

Numbers

Percentage

1. Proximal phalanx Fracture

1

Orthopedics

78

64.40%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

27

22.30%

 

3

Neurology

4

3.30%

2. Stroke

1

Neurology

81

66.90%

Neurology

2

Medicine

23

19.00%

 

3

Orthopedics

4

3.30%

3. Hand-Burns

1

Plastic Surgery

43

35.10%

Hand Surgery

2

Paediatrics

36

29.70%

 

3

ER

11

9.00%

4. Elbow Dislocation

1

Orthopedics

100

82.60%

Orthopedics

2

Hand Surgery

6

4.90%

 

3

Sports Medicine

5

4.10%

5. Flexor Tenosynovitis

1

Medicine

32

26.40%

Hand Surgery

2

Surgery

28

23.10%

 

3

Hand Surgery

24

19.80%

6. Flexor Tendon Injury

1

Orthopedics

53

43.80%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

38

31.40%

 

3

Physiotherapy

9

7.40%

7. Scaphoid Fracture

1

Orthopedics

75

61.90%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand surgery

21

17.30%

 

3

Physiotherapy

6

4.90%

8. Carpel Tunnel Syndrome

1

Medicine

38

31.40%

Hand Surgery

2

Neurology

37

30.50%

 

3

Hand Surgery

12

9.90%

9. Rheumatic Hand Deformity

1

Hand Surgery

27

22.30%

Rheumatology

2

Rheumatology

27

22.30%

 

3

Orthopedics

26

21.40%

10. Ulnar Nerve Injury

1

Hand Surgery

35

28.90%

Hand Surgery

2

Orthopedics

35

28.90%

 

3

Neurology

17

14.00%

11. Obstetric Brachial Plexus Palsy

1

Orthopedics

43

35.50%

Hand Surgery

2

Paediatrics

40

33.00%

 

3

Neurology

16

13.20%

12. (Cleft) Hand Deformity

1

Orthopedics

55

45.40%

Hand surgery

2

PlasticSurgery

29

23.90%

 

3

Hand Surgery

11

9%

13. Traumatic (Metacarpal) Hand Deformity

1

Plastic Surgery

62

51.20%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

34

28.00%

 

3

Orthopedics

12

9.90%

14. Venflon site Ulcer – Dorsum of hand

1

Surgery

63

52.00%

Hand Surgery

2

Medicine

27

22.30%

 

3

Hand Surgery

8

6.60%

15. Vascular Malformation of hand

1

Vascular Surgery

60

49.50%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

18

14.80%

 

3

Surgery

13

10.70%

16. Cerebral Palsy

1

Neurology

32

26.40%

Neurology

2

Orthopedics

26

21.40%

 

3

Paediatrics

20

16.50%

17. Elbow Sprain

1

Orthopedics

100

82.60%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

4

3.30%

 

3

Physiotherapy

2

1.60%

18. Carcinoma (Squamous cell) little finger

1

Oncology

53

43.80%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

21

17.30%

 

3

Surgery

20

16.50%

19. Shoulder Periarthritis

1

Orthopedics

70

57.80%

Orthopedics

2

Medicine

23

19.00%

 

3

Physiotherapy

5

4.10%

20. Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

1

Neurology

39

32.20%

Hand Surgery

2

Medicine

26

21.40%

 

3

Orthopedics

22

18.10%

21. Volkmann Ischemic Contracture

1

Orthopedics

48

39.60%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

29

23.90%

 

3

Neurology

15

12.30%

22. Raw Area Forearm (skin loss)

1

Plastic Surgery

41

33.80%

Hand Surgery

2

Surgery

30

24.70%

 

3

Orthopedics

19

15.70%

23. Colles’ Fracture

1

Orthopedics

90

74.30%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

18

14.80%

 

3

Medicine

2

1.60%

24. Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy

1

Neurology

51

42.10%

Hand Surgery

2

Orthopedics

45

37.10%

 

3

Hand Surgery

8

6.60%

25. Congenital (Madelung) Hand deformity

1

Orthopedics

62

51.20%

Hand Surgery

2

Hand Surgery

33

27.20%

 

3

Neurology

8

6.60%

Questions 2,4,9, 16 and 19 are non-hand surgery referral cases added to questionnaire

Table 2: Top three responses to each of the 20 clinical conditions

For closer analysis, the responses were divided as given by the different sub-groups- doctors, junior nurses and senior nurses. The number and percentage of the responses appropriately referring the patient to the department of hand surgery by each of these subgroups were calculated (table 3). In all the 20 questions, except for doctors in the clinical scenario of flexor tendon injury (58%) none of the 3 subgroups referred even half (50%) of the patients to Hand surgery. There were several questions such as scalding burns of hand, flexor tenosynovitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, obstetric brachial plexus palsy, thoracic outlet syndrome, Colles fracture and traumatic brachial plexus palsy where one or more sub-groups did not refer any patients to the department of hand surgery. The average reference percentage of the junior nurse was 3.91%, senior nurse was 21.9% and doctors was 23.95%. Junior nurses performed exceedingly poor in referring cases to the department of hand surgery as compared to the other two subgroups.

Diagnosis & Department

Medical Staff Sub-group

Numbers referred to Hand Surgery Department

Percentage referred to Hand Surgery Department

1. Proximal Phalanx Fracture

JN

2

4.80%

Hand Surgery

SN

9

23.60%

 

D

16

44.40%

2. Hand-Burns

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

0

0.00%

 

D

1

2.70%

3. Flexor Tenosynovitis

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

8

21.00%

 

D

16

44.40%

4. Flexor Tendon Injury

JN

3

7.30%

Hand Surgery

SN

14

36.80%

 

D

21

58.30%

5. Scaphoid Fracture

JN

1

2.40%

Hand Surgery

SN

7

18.40%

 

D

13

36.10%

6. Carpel Tunnel Syndrome

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

6

15.70%

 

D

6

16.60%

7. Ulnar Nerve Injury

JN

3

7.30%

Hand Surgery

SN

17

44.70%

 

D

15

41.60%

8. Obstetric Brachial Plexus Palsy

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

6

15.70%

 

D

0

0.00%

9. (Cleft) Hand Deformity

JN

1

2.40%

Hand surgery

SN

7

18.40%

 

D

3

8.30%

10. Traumatic (Metacarpal) Hand Deformity

JN

4

9.70%

Hand Surgery

SN

15

39.40%

 

D

15

41.60%

11. Venflon site Ulcer- Dorsum of hand

JN

2

4.80%

Hand Surgery

SN

5

13.10%

 

D

1

2.70%

12. Vascular Malformation of hand

JN

1

2.40%

Hand Surgery

SN

6

15.70%

 

D

11

30.50%

13. Elbow Sprain

JN

1

2.40%

Hand Surgery

SN

1

2.40%

 

D

2

4.80%

14. Carcinoma (Squamous cell) little finger

JN

2

4.80%

Hand Surgery

SN

6

15.70%

 

D

13

36.10%

15. Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

6

15.70%

 

D

0

0.00%

16. Volkmann Ischemic Contracture

JN

3

7.10%

Hand Surgery

SN

18

47.30%

 

D

9

25.00%

17. Raw Area Forearm

JN

4

9.70%

Hand Surgery

SN

5

13.10%

 

D

6

16.60%

18. Colle's Fracture

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

11

28.90%

 

D

8

22.20%

19. Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy

JN

0

0.00%

Hand Surgery

SN

5

13.10%

 

D

3

8.30%

20. Congenital (Madelung) - Hand deformity

JN

5

13.10%

Hand Surgery

SN

15

39.40%

 

D

14

38.80%

*JN- junior nurses; SN- senior nurses; D-Doctors

Table 3: Comparison of responses of the 20 clinical conditions between doctors, junior nurses and senior nurses

Discussion

Hand surgery is as old as surgery itself, dating back to prehistoric times, or to Egyptian and Greek antiquity. Hippocrates (460±356 BC) has given useful advice about reduction and stabilization of wrist, hand and finger fractures and dislocations [5]. Even though Hand surgery had existed for such a long time, it required an eye opener like Dr. Sterling Bunnell, the American father of Hand Surgery to establish a separate department for it. He trained several hand surgeons and helped organise several hand surgery centers following the period of the second world war [6,7] which played a major role in giving hand surgery an opportunity to crown herself as a unique and separate speciality. Ironically even after several decades of existence, knowledge and understanding of common hand surgical conditions and awareness of the subspeciality among physicians in India is still negligible [8]. The poor literacy level and level of awareness of the general public in India is also a setback. With this in one side, on the other extreme there are views from leading scholars that the expanding knowledge base of Hand surgery, increasing technological advances and changes in the surgical experiences makes a 12-month experience too short even for a hand surgery trainee [9]. Doctors from other specialities are themselves quite unaware as to the spectrum of patients catered by the department of hand surgery. It is no surprise that junior residents and nursing staff are also in the same milieu. This study clearly shows the lack of awareness and knowledge about the department among the triaging staff who are made up of junior doctors and nurses. The lack of awareness in the triaging staff could be the starting point of a vicious cycle (lack of awareness à failure to refer patients à decrease in patient load à department not achieving its full potentialà lack of awareness in other hospital staff) which could interfere with the establishment of the speciality. Since proper triaging regarding patients needing hand surgery becomes important for the patient to get the most appropriate treatment with minimum shunting around but also helps in the improvement and refinement of the speciality. Even in complicated, complex cases or patient operated unsuccessfully elsewhere, it is possible to enhance the skill and knowledge only if the patient reaches the department promptly. This is where triaging plays a major role and it becomes our responsibility to make the triaging staff, the paramedics and even the public acquainted with the conditions treated in the department of hand surgery. In the fast-paced environment of the out patients’ department, critical thinking, evaluation and decision making by the triaging staff plays a key role in efficient treatment of patients [10]. It requires the staff to have a strong foundation in basic clinical knowledge which needs to be frequently updated and refreshed equipping them to make quick logical decisions. Not many institutions have a comprehensive standardised training programme for triaging, thus creating a lacuna in the process. This study further emphasises the above-mentioned fact. For triage training, a combination of multiple teaching methods and training approaches such as human patient simulation, computer learning games or virtual reality triage training might offer an alternative or adjunct for triage training in non-clinical situations [11]. However, these would be much more labor-intensive than currently used methods which include regular refresher training programs, testing of factual knowledge (e.g. with case scenarios), and direct observation of triage performance including feedback [11].

Conclusion

Triage systems aim not only to ensure clinical justice for the patient, but also to provide an effective tool for departmental organisation, monitoring and evaluation [12]. From the study it is clear that most of the triaging staff were unaware of the spectrum of patients being dealt with in the department of hand surgery. They were mostly referring the patients to department to which they would have referred the patients to if the dept of hand surgery did not exist. Junior nurses performed sub-standard to the senior nurses and doctors who were also struggling to identify the department of reference for the patients. This study shows us the drawbacks in our present triaging system causing some of the problems a new budding department would face in its blooming stages such as low patient load, increased number of references of a patient, decreased cure rates and slow growth of the department. We focus on propagating the speciality or the medical condition via social media and posters to reach the public. But we have forgotten an important intermediate building block, the triaging staff who play a very important role of delegating the patient to the correct department. Along with creating public awareness, training our staff on the advancements and updated protocols is a very crucial step in the development of an institution and a healthy society.

Limitation of the study

This is only the first part of a larger study. A training module is to be conducted for the triaging staff following which a post training assessment will be done to see the efficiency of the training and if required modification of the training programme will be done. Further studies can also be done to compare different triage algorithms to help overcome the variability and subjectivity.

Acknowledgements

None

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflict of interest

None

References

  1. Bottrill MC, Joseph LN, Carwardine J, et al. Is conservation triage just smart decision making? Trends Ecol Evol 23 (2008): 649-654.
  2. Kennedy K, Aghababian R, Gans L, et al. Triage: Techniques and Applications in Decisionmaking. Annals of Emergency Medicine 28 (1996): 136-144.
  3. Christian MD. Triage. Crit Care Clin 35 (2019): 575-589.
  4. Mistry B, Balhara KS, Hinson JS, et al. Nursing Perceptions of the Emergency Severity Index as a Triage Tool in the United Arab Emirates: A Qualitative Analysis. J Emerg Nurs 44 (2018): 360-367.
  5. Verdan C, MuseÂe de la Main. Primary repair of flexor tendons. J Hand Surg Am 25 (2000): 1-241.
  6. Omer GE. Development of hand surgery: Education of hand surgeons. Journal of Hand Surgery 25 (2000): 616-628.
  7. Hage JJ. History Off-Hand: Bunnell’s No-Man’s Land. Hand 14 (2019): 570-574.
  8. Jain DK. Awareness of hand surgical conditions and management, in general practioners and emergency department physicians in India (2020).
  9. Jupiter J. Hand surgery fellowships: Time for reconsideration? (2011).
  10. Noon AJ. The cognitive processes underpinning clinical decision in triage assessment: A theoretical conundrum? Int Emerg Nurs 22 (2014): 40-46.
  11. Jordi K, Grossmann F, Gaddis GM, et al. Nurses’ accuracy and self-perceived ability using the Emergency Severity Index triage tool: A cross-sectional study in four Swiss hospitals. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 23 (2015).
  12. FitzGerald G, Jelinek GA, Scott D, Gerdtz MF. Emergency department triage revisited. Emergency Medicine Journal 27 (2010): 86-92.

© 2016-2024, Copyrights Fortune Journals. All Rights Reserved